#it's basically an entirely different relationship/personalities just with the same physical characteristics | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mercurytrinemoon · 4 years ago

Text

Another post on Moon signs you can drag me for

Before we get into the actual thing, I'd like to say this post initially started as something else but ultimately, what I tried to put across is, sometimes Moon signs aren’t that easy to decipher. It’s easy to grasp overall characteristics of the signs and then learn how to identify their specific traits. But what people seem to forget it that Moon represents the deepest side of us & our inner world - it’s uncommon to really see someone’s side of it unless you really pay attention. Sometimes I’m surprised to see what someone’s Moon sign is even if I know this person well. Meaning, people usually hide that part of them - or they just simply process it internally and others can’t see their emotional reactions. It’s also uncommon for folks these days to fully express their emotional needs so it gets even trickier to pin-point their Moon characteristics. I don't think I have to mention this but, of course, your entire chart should be taken into account, as well as house placement, aspects. Personally, I like to also look at Moon's dispositor.

Let’s start from my friends, Gemini Moons, who, I feel, get a bad rep for not showing their feelings and scanning every emotion like an AI. Nah-ah. I know this one Gemini Moon whose immediate emotional reactions aren’t very cerebral in the sense of processing everything in the mind and intellectualizing it aka, what people like to label as being un-emotional. Instead her reactions are often fast (air energy) but physically expressed through Mercury (Gemini Moon’s dispositor) and Sun (overall identity) – she has them both in Aries. She’s a crybaby who can burst into tears in a matter of seconds. So she’s not something that would stereotypically be assigned to a Gemini Moon. But what I did notice is that all Gemini Moons tend to have this weird look on their face when they’re processing stuff. As if they were about to have a brain malfunction; they stop and have that specific worried look. They also like to either gossip or tell stories (either real or made up lol); they’re great with words - they can talk for hours if they feel comfortable with you. They just crave interaction and mental stimulation. Their quick reactions tend to make them effortlessly witty. Even if they’re a withdrawn Gemini type, they make up for it through social media and technology or just a quiet exploration. My shy Cancer pal with Moon in Gemini is now a brand/website designer and an instagram queen who travels the world. This is great energy for content creators in general. And don’t forget that Geminis need to have their fingers in many pies. It’s because they always have a backup plan… and they get bored easily so they need that chaos around them to feel at home. They like to have options in everything, which is kind of funny cause it’s hard for them to make up their minds and actually choose something. And they store a lot of information in their brains… I feel like it must be exhausting, no?

On the other side of the axis, whenever I see someone with a Sagittarius Moon, I can immediately say “yup, a Sag Moon indeed” (probably thanks to my Sag stellium), meaning, they all seem the same to me. Sag Moons often find comfort in exploration - best if it’s literal travel. They always seem to need to free themselves from their surroundings, family, roots or their own culture to discover something new and exciting, even if it’s only in the imaginary words - through books, movies and other medias. Their happiness always lies somewhere else from where they currently are. Like, I think all Sagittarius Moons that I know have left their parents and went their own paths early on. And they have this yolo attitude. Just like Sagittarius Suns, they’re massive dorks, probably also obnoxious… sometimes in a REALLY annoying way. They’re either a) very wise and curious b) lil preachy and stuck up c) just plain dumb clowns with no filter. But they’re all funny. And they take things lightly, with a natural ease. This means sometimes they may offend other people just because they assume everyone’s as chill as they are; „relax! I was just kidding!” - that’s a phrase you’ll hear from them often… I mean, unless you’re a jokester yourself and you’re unmoved by their sarcastic or teasing words. They have somewhat spiritual or philosophical nature so besides making you laugh, be prepared for deep monologues. They want to believe everything will eventually fall into place. It’s also hard to bring them down - or I should say, it’s hard to make them acknowledge that they're feeling down - they always try to distract or cover it up with a joke, usually a self-depricating one. If Sagittarius Moon (or Sagittarius in general tbh) is telling you that they’re unhappy, then it’s serious.

I’ve noticed there comes a point in life for a Libra Moon where they just have enough. They’re too nice for everyone and one day they wake up and yell about how they have to do everything for everyone and everyone wants something from them and bLah bLah. Makes me think of when Bieber was this overly nice kid and then he was like “I’M NOT TAKING PICTURES WITH FANS ANYMOREEEE AAGhJFJFUWIUq”. Yup, a Libra Moon, everyone. They know how to charm and appeal to people, I think overall they’re easily liked by others. Sometimes it’s simply because they like to kiss people’s ass just to avoid being rejected. That’d be a Libra Moon’s nightmare. They like other people’s company too much. And they thrive in relationships and in a big circle of friends. What they hate is confrontations (like every other Libra placement omg). They may be good mediators when it comes to other people but if they’re involved in an argument they get sooooo passive aggressive. They just don’t know how to handle conflicts - it’s as if their nervous system wasn’t designed for emotional outbursts (because, you know, everything needs to be peaceful and harmonious Venus-style). A fussy or angry Libra Moon will suddenly get loud as they blame someone for something… and then they’ll leave the room cause they’re scared to even hear the other side of the argument. Or, alternatively, they’ll make a doormat out of themselves just to stay quiet and avoid causing any rift. And making decisions? I think it’s common for them to have two different romantic interests and feeling so dramatically torned between them *Alexa play Agony from Into the Woods*. Then when they decide, they have problems breaking the bad news to one of them.

On the other end we have Aries Moons. *deep breath* Listen, I think I’ve said enough about having Moon in Aries (or rather purely dissing it) but last time it made a bit of controversy so why not wreak even more havoc. I have a good description for this one: I will punch you but be gentle with me cause it’s easy to break my fragile heart. So basically, imagine putting Buttercup and Bubbles into one person. And honestly, I need to say this, women with this placement are just hot badasses, look at friggin Angelina Jolie. The queen of badass. The queen of hot. People say because Aries folks move quickly (literally and figuratively lol), they often get bored with whatever got them excited last week... or yesterday. Ha, yeah, right. You get their heart to open up and they’re going to have their eyes for you ONLY, like a lil puppy. Give us treats and we’ll build our world around you. But NOT in a clingy way by any means, we need our space and independence after all. My lil niece is an Aries Moon and ever since I started playing guitar with her, she became my #1 fan or something. That’s the energy. But we get easily bored with day-to-day stuff so yeah, there’s that. Innocent and clumsy yet raw in their emotions - so there’s potential to make mistakes sometimes (or a lot of times) or having this tunnel vision, like „I want this and I don’t care about anything else!”. And then excusing it with some „but the heart wants what it wants” crap (looking @ ya, Selena Gomez). They experience constant inner movement and turbulence that needs a physical outlet in order to feel satisfied. WE NEED PASSION IN OUR LIVES, OKAY?!?!?? now leave me alone

Aquarius Moons aren’t as cold as you might think. People like to describe them as if their Moons actually disappeared from their charts: dEtaCheD, uNeMotiOnaL, tHey fEeL nOtHinG. It’s just they don’t sit and dwell on things, they find solutions to the problems. If something doesn’t make them feel right, they just leave that situation. They do care about other people’s well-being, they’re very sensitive in that regard, they’re humanitarians after all. Yeah, they detach, but from their own emotions - in order to make sense of them. They may seem like snow queens sometimes (and this comes from an Aqua rising) but they’re really friendly and if you pique Aqua Moon’s interest, they’re going to be curious about you. They like new exciting things so if you’re cool enough, you have their attention. Usually they’re pretty progressive as well and can’t stand injustice. That’s why you’ll see them standing up for those who are in need. Uranian energy gives them a specific type of sharp intuition and wit. Idk they’re just cute in a quirky way. But this buzzing, fast energy is a great recipe for anxiety, over-thinking and frequent changes of heart. Similarly to Sadges, they need constant exploration and stimuli. Intelligent, people-oriented (but not people-pleasing! Look to Libras for that), individualistic. They definitely need their own space and independence. Their decision-making is fast and it’s easy for them to just say „screw it, I’m doing this”. My Aquarius Moon friend just casually decided that she’s moving to Turkey cause nothing in our city (or even country) seems interesting or helping her expand… So she was like, see ya suckers, I’m leaving.

Leo Moons shine from within. You’ll spot them from a mile away even if they’re on the shyer side. They’re all lil stars no matter their profession. Very expressive people & easily excitable. Art galleries, live shows, theater - they love a creative environment even if they don’t pursue that lifestyle themselves... One of my Leo Moon friends is an art junkie – suggest taking her to an obscure play at the local bar, a music festival, a weird museum – she’ll say yes in the blink of an eye. And she loves discussing these things. A Leo Moon may not see themselves as artistically inclined, but usually sooner or later they at least try dipping their toes in music, arts, acting, dancing... you name it. They’ll learn a simple 3-chord song on a ukulele and then play it to you in excitement. Imagine a lil kid making you a puff piece and being super proud of it. Sometimes they just need some encouragement. Remember, Leos feed off of praise, that’s their fuel. Doesn’t mean they’re all proud, egotistical people but what it does mean is that they need a lil assurance to gain their self-confidence. I lived with a Leo Sun/Moon for almost 15 years (who’s a musician btw so yeah, a classic creative Leo type) - he did have some issues lol but ego wasn’t one of them. Drama followed him everywhere but I’m pretty sure he disliked it himself. BUT, with that being said, I feel like Leo Moons tend to dramatize themselves internally. People say it’s something Virgos or Geminis would do - because of their tendency to overthink, but Leos can just go straight to a worst-case scenario in their heads simply because they exaggerate everything. So don’t be surprised to see a Leo Moon feeling down and anxious. On the bright side, be their cheerleader and they’ll give that to you in return. They need sparks and dullness kills their upbeat spirit. They need to feel their own heartbeat so the feeling of excitement is crucial for their well-being. Romantic, giving and kind. They’re fixed fire so once they’re set on something or someone, they give their all and are rather loyal.

I feel like my chart low-key tells me I should dislike Taurus Moons but I just want to melt in their arms and just stay there? Like, forever? Low maintenance but a bit slow-moving and stubborn. They won’t settle easily, at least not officially, so you need to have a lot of patience with them. They need 3 things to feel secure and at peace: physical stimuli, time and a stable place they know they can always come back to. And it’s not like all of them are total lazy homebodies, they may be active spirits & travellers but they are going to have a reallyyyyy nice cosy flat somewhere near their childhood place (gotta be be close to their moms, you know). Not necessary materialistic but they may have one thing that they collect throughout their entire life and they won’t. ever. get. rid. of. it. There needs to be at least one constant in their life - like you know when Elton John decided to go to therapy but one thing he stuck to was shopaholism? Very Taurus Moon of him. Also, they’re very affectionate. In fact, may have issues differentiating between affection and passion - this is actually something Taurus Moon and Aries Moon have in common. Pro tip - and this is in regard to all Taurus placements - don’t smell bad when you’re around them (I mean, don't smell bad in general, no one likes stinky people lol). They have a sensitive smell. Doesn’t help that they like to smell everything. EVERYTHING. I swear, Taurus, stop sticking your nose in every single thing!!! You don't need to know how that piece of utensil smells like. Jeez.

Scorpio Moon (shoutout to those who remember me accidentally calling them sporpio last time I made a post on Moons lol). I honestly don’t know what to tell you... I feel like all you hear about Scorpio Moon is 100% true, there’s nothing to debunk here. It’s the Moon of extremes. Prone to jealousy and surpressing emotions; severe trust issues; they’re instigators. I was low-key bullied by a few Scorpio Moons when I was in school so there’s that. Very secretive and private. Scorpio Moon will be like “I’m in control of the situation!!!!” and you’ll just look at them and think, yeah, right, looks like the situation is controlling you. But keep being in denial, sure. Like, don’t get me wrong, Scorpios in general can be TOTAL SWEETHEARTS OMG but ya’ll have issues. Even celebrities who have this placements... Think Beyonce or Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus... I feel like they have issues lol, especially with control and the need for everything to be perfectly the way they want it to be. To be fair, that’s probably why they’re all so influential and high status: it’s either their way or highway. They need constant reinvention; they’re the ones to wake up one day and decide they’re going through a spiritual awakening blah blah. They also like to talk about dark and shocking topics while having casual lunch with you... So like, be warned that you may end up with a depressed mood after talking to them for 10 minutes. And their mood swings... don’t even get me started on that.

I don't know where to start with Virgo Moons... I feel like they're very calculated and nit-picky but they're a lot warmer than Virgo Suns. I think I called them softies in my last Moon post. Very sweet people but prone to anxiety. You gotta experience seeing them having a heart attack over someone mixing bananas with milk or messing with their stuff that’s been put in a perfect arrangement. I saw a Virgo Moon once literally squealing shouting "YOU'RE GONNA RUIN YOUR LAPTOP WITH THAT SUPERGLUE!!!" Highly entertaining to watch, not gonna lie. Gordon Ramsay has his Moon in Virgo - it’s conjunct Uranus and Pluto so that’s an extreme but I think him being fed up with people over small inconsistencies in their food prep is a perfect example of this energy (btw his chart is hilarious, it literally explains EVERYTHING). They're VERY picky with their food as well, just as Virgo Suns tend to be. Like, they’ll only have a specific type of single origin coffee or they’ll be vegan or something. Self-critical over their work, which is a plus... except for when finishing a simple task takes them a few hours because they want to make it perfect. They take everything seriously. This of course doesn't mean they're total bores - on the contrary, Mercurial energy gives them witty approach and a talent for choosing the right words at the right time. Tho they can be a bit awkward or shy with it. Can be as bubbly as Gemini but the grounded earthy energy gives them more practical and almost nurturing nature - earth signs are providers after all and Virgo is the sign of service - helping others is like their second nature. I’ve noticed they often find comfort in devoting themselves to a choosen task - this is why if they pursue something, they’re really good at it. They’re also very likely to dissect their emotions.

I’m not a fan of water Moons in general but Pisces Moon is the best water Moon in my opinion. Maybe because I like Pisces overall. I think it’s like a tweaked Sagittarius Moon - just more internalized, withdrawn & gloomy. But unlike Sag, who has a tendency to be an adventurous optimist, Pisces likes to focus on the negatives instead. Obviously, they can be very upbeat, they’re Jupiter-ruled after all, but there’s somehing whiny about them lol. Just like Sadges, they dream big and have their standards put up sooo high but if there's not much active energy in their charts, they’re often too passive to actually fullfill any of that - or I should say, they’re stuck daydreaming about it, believing it’ll just magically manifest for them... OR they do everything with an apathetic approach. What I do like about them is that they’re funny. And really chill - sometimes to the point of coming off as confused or hazy. I feel like a lot of them would just love to sleep all day... or sit by the lake and just think about the world. Most of them are also compassionate folks - again, maybe a bit too much. Hey Pisces, you don’t have to take everything to heart, it’s okay. On the bright side, they have big imagination and the ability to disconnect and just create. I have a few Pisces Moons in the family: one’s that sleepy artistic type with grand visions, one is an asshole-ish but funny entrepreneur with a questionable work ethic and one is a witty IT guy who’s actually a workaholic and likes to shut in his own world of computers and numbers or whatever he does there... So there’s this factor of tunnel vision, escapism and, on the more negative side, being kinda iffy and almost addicted to the way they want things to be. Once they set their eyes on something it’s done deal…

My issue with Capricorn Moons is that they're often trying to be sooooo mature omg, like, loosen up a bit. It usually starts when they're in their later teens... They can be the most rebellious kid that likes to have fun and suddenly they'll be like "I'm too old for this ugh grow up" *judgmental stare*. My 18-year old niece once literally roasted my sister that she's in her 30s and still doesn't have her own place (well so do I so I guess she also indirectly roasted me as well???). And she was SO deadpan with it. Because she herself wants to be independent and start a family before turning 25. This is classic Capricorn Moon energy. They suck out joy out of everything lol. Of course, OF COURSE, it depends on the whole chart but I feel like worst-case scenario is that at one point in their life (or maybe even a few times throughout it) they go through a massive shake-up that makes them change their attitude and re-evaluate their structures. There's this multi-instrumentalist Yvette Young - she's a sweet, funny Cancer/Leo mix but her Moon is in Capricorn. She used to be a competitive pianist but the pressure that was put on her has led her to severe health issues. Like yes, she’s now an extremely talented musician - thanks to family’s expectations & a rigid schooling system (Saturn) but it did cost her a lot. She has recovered since then but I think it's a perfect example of this energy. It’s very ambitious and hardworking but emotionally demanding in the sense that you have to actually put your emotions aside in order to deal with the rest. Another thing, because Moon can be associated with family, there's often a weird dynamic surrounding this topic. I don't think I've met a Capricorn Moon that had a completely healthy and happy relationship with their fam or one of the family members. Or, alternatively, there can be a strong bond between one of them but usually created in the atmosphere of hardships.

Last but not least, Cancer Moons. I had three school friends with this placement and all of them made this sad, whiny face as they said „oh I don’t knoooow anymoreee” when they were feeling torned or frustrated. To be fair, two of them are water Suns so for them, it added to the mushyness. All Cancer Moons I know are family people or better yet, baby people. One of those school friends is now a guidance counsellor, working with kids; the other turned her instagram into a gallery of her own child after she gave birth. So much kid content, omg. There’s also something very indecisive about them… or I should say, hesitant. They’re not very fast at making decisions. Also, what’s interesting, they’re kind of like walking libraries, they remember a lot – so they store a lot of information in their brains just like air signs but they process it in a completely different way – emotional, obviously. I think this also makes them hold grudges a lot. For them it’s more of a question of „how does it make me feel?” rather than „how valid is it?”. There’s certain stubborness in them in that regard because they don’t keep their minds open. It’s also hard for them to walk away from people and situations, like a crab pinching you with its claws – it won’t let go. Sensitive but not easy to open up; very protective of themselves and their loved ones & they tend to shut down in their crab shells. But they may crave connection and the feeling of belonging. Also very caring and with a big imagination. They’re very receptive of their environment so mood swings are a thing for them.

1K notes · View notes

astermacguffin · 4 years ago

Text

In previous posts, you can see my attempts of unraveling the mystery of fics and their relationships with canonicity and character.

But really. What is a "character"? When we claim that something is "out-of-character" in a piece of media, what concept are we really invoking?

I will start right away with a FIRM denial of the necessity of a Platonist account of character. I don't think you need to posit the existence of this otherworldly realm of Forms in order to meaningfully talk about characters. (I mean, you certainly can and I'm not stopping you. It's just that. You don't exactly need to do that in order to make sense of characters, you know?)

So if characters aren't these entities floating around in some Realm of Ideas that we mysteriously have access to, then what exactly are they?

Here comes my primary claim (and basically the main driving force of this entire essay): characters are inferential constructs. The creation and reception of characters are the products of inference, the same way the conclusion of an argument is a product of inference.

Let's unpack this definition I'm proposing. To do that, let's first look at the process of creating and consuming media (and, in turn, characters).

The Author

The Author (referring to either a singular person or a team of creatives responsible for bringing the piece into existence) usually has a characterization in mind when creating characters: "I want Character A to have X, Y..., Z properties." This spans from physical characteristics all the way to their personality. This is what I call the Properties View of Character: the notion of character as a collection of properties.

The Text

When writing the piece, The Author then has to convert these sets of properties in their head(s) into people and events that unfold on their own. They can't just say "this character has X, Y..., Z properties," they have to actually show us those properties and make them manifest in the piece.

This conversion happens through The Author asking: "What would Character A do in a Scenario T?" Which is just another way of saying "What would a person with X, Y..., Z properties do in a Scenario T?" This is the first inference schema (which I call the Agentive Schema) of the process:

If any arbitrary person S with properties {X, Y..., Z} is confronted with a Scenario T, then they would likely do Action U.

Character A has properties {X, Y..., Z}.

Character A is confronted with a Scenario T.

Therefore, I shall write Character A doing Action U (because doing so will show The Audience that Character A has {X, Y..., Z} properties).

This schema has a counterpart I call the Experiential Schema, where instead of asking "what would this type of person do in this scenario?", we instead ask: "what type of person would result from experiencing certain scenarios?" This is the schema we use when coming up with backstories or plot points that cause a change-of-heart in characters.

If a person S with properties {L, M..., N}* experiences an Event H, then person S would likely obtain properties {X, Y..., Z}.

Character A has properties {L, M..., N}.

Character A experiences Event H.

Therefore, I shall write Character A experiencing Event H (because doing so will explain to The Audience why Character A has {X, Y..., Z} properties).

*(The set {L, M..., N} is there to denote that different people with different sets of properties can react differently to the same scenario)

It's also important to note that these two schemas aren't as separate as they appear and that they often interact in a dynamic way. For example, the actions that a person do (i.e. agentive) are technically also events that happen to the person (i.e. experiential).

For example, let's say your character is forced by circumstance to kill someone to save a loved one. This is also the very first time they took a life. This example can be looked at under both an agentive lens ("What does this say about this character that they are willing to kill for the sake of a loved one?") and an experiential lens ("What does killing someone for the first time do to a person?") This example is meant to emphasize the fact that characters aren't static machines or mathematical functions where you just feed an input and wait for an output. If you want to stick with the machine analogy, then the act of feeding them inputs actually change the machines themselves as they spit out their outputs.

Both of these schemas are used by Authors in order to establish a set of evidences that the Audience can use to infer what kind of people these characters are and will become.

If we are strictly speaking in terms of the text, then characters actually aren't collections of properties, but instead collections of events, hence why I call it the Events View of Character. From this angle, characters aren't presented as "this character has Properties X, Y..., Z" but rather as "this character did Actions P, Q...,R // this character experienced Events H, I..., J // this character has Internal States (e.g. thoughts, beliefs, emotions, etc.) & Dispositions (values, preferences, desires, etc.) D, E..., F". The things that characters do, think, feel, and experience all contribute to who they are as a person, and all of these are better categorized as "events" that happen in the text rather than "properties."

The Properties View is an abstraction that only happens when there's actually a person there to do the abstracting and inferring.

The Audience

Most of the time, you don't actually have access to what set of properties are in the Author's mind that they wanted to convey about their characters. And even at the cases where they do disclose the intentions behind their characterization, the fact that it's even possible to argue about whether or not their intended characterization actually manifested successfully in their work should tell you something about the very nature of characters and character-making.

The Events View is very cumbersome and difficult; when you're talking to someone about a character, you're rarely (if ever) gonna cite every single thing they did or experienced in the text. The most likely option is that you'll summarize these into the core traits that you think make their character. Therefore, The Audience (referring to either a specific person or a group) returns to the Properties View by abstracting and inferring from the evidence in the source material.

Notice how different the relationship of the Author and the Audience is with the Text. On the one hand, the Author has a "deductive" relationship with the text: they start from general principles (e.g. "Character A is brave and kind") and instantiate those into specific things and events in the text (e.g. "Character A does brave and kind things").

On the other hand, the engagement of the Audience with the text is more "inductive" and evidentialist. You start from specific instances in the text (e.g. "Character A does Actions P, Q, R") and then based on how you assess these "evidences," you infer the qualities that this character has as a person. For example, if you judge that "P, Q, and R are actions done by a brave and kind person", you might end up concluding that "Character A is a brave and kind person."

In a future post, I will then talk about the Audience versions of the Agentive and Experiential schemas and what they reveal about audience disagreement when it comes to interpreting canon.

#fandom studies #aster writes #long post

50 notes · View notes

interact-if · 4 years ago

Note

I’m sending this in because it seems like I could get good opinions from not only you but also the people who follow you. I have an idea for an IF, and I’m very excited for the story. My question is, would people be offended if I made the playable MC physically female that identifies as female and all the ROs physically male that identify as male? I have seen some out there that are strictly M/M or F/F, and I’m so happy they exist because I feel that population is underserved. I just feel, not having the experience, I could bring justice to writing LGBTQ+ (and I don’t want to offend anyone in that community by writing something incorrect), mostly when it comes to sex (which I plan on including in my game). I support games that have those relationships in them and admire them, even play those games, and I don’t care who plays my game. The more the merrier! I still want the characters to be diverse. One of them will be of a descent that is based on Japanese culture and many others, based on Persian culture. I also want the playable MC to have any skin tone/features the player wants. I just want to know if this…will have people coming after me? I want to tell my story, but I don’t want to be attacked for it, if that makes sense?

I really don’t mean to offend anyone. I just don’t want to cause trouble, and I just want to respectfully ask for people’s opinions on this.

Hello! So, before diving into our response, we’d like to emphasize that we are but five individuals running a blog devoted to interactive fiction. We are neither the end-all-be-all voice on this matter nor necessarily a representative mouthpiece for the community.

First off, you can write whatever you would like to write; as the author, you have absolute control over what you produce, so nobody is going to stop you from writing what you want to write. It’s also important to write what you enjoy.

That said, the community is, in our experience, very inclusive, and largely devoted to providing a space for the queer community. We can understand the desire to have an appropriately inclusive and diverse game, and why you particularly want to turn to characters of color to bridge the gap; however, substituting characters of color for queer characters to claim diversity in a project is possibly something that will receive the wrong kind of attention. Furthermore, assuming that writing characters of color well is any less complex than writing queer characters potentially suggests that said characters could end up underdeveloped or tokenized. (See Nines' and Roast’s response below for more context)

All of that doesn’t mean you can’t make a game that’s genderlocked and restricted to M/F romance, and I don’t think anyone will be offended by such a game, but it might limit your audience. At the same time, there are (many) other visual novels that have this format, so it’s not something unheard of. As far as CoGs and text-based games go, as far as we’ve seen, they are rarely genderlocked unless for plot reasons, etc.

There is also a chance that you may receive feedback requesting that the MC be un-gender locked, or for additional ROs to be added of different gender, or for the ROs to be made gender selectable. These requests may be gentle, insistent, kind, or aggressive, and they may only occur at the beginning of your work, or may occur throughout your game development. Maybe they’ll never happen at all. It’s impossible to predict the future, but in our experience, we have often seen this occur to games in the past with RO gender imbalances, locks, etc.

As for searching for feedback, if you’re looking for feedback but you’re not pursuing the CoG format, may we suggest the Reddit subforum? It’s a little difficult for you to get the feedback/dialogue going here that you’d likely like to get, so Reddit’s format may be more conducive to your needs.

In the meanwhile, those who would like to provide their thoughts are encouraged to respond in the comments of this post. Please remember to be polite with your discussion!

— — —

The above is our general mod response; a few of us wanted to offer some individual thoughts as well, and those can be found below. These are personal opinions and reflect each individual mod’s thoughts, rather than a collective response.

While it can be a little daunting to write about something you’re not familiar with, writing often broaches topics with which we don’t personally have first-hand experience. Additionally, queer relationships are ultimately still relationships between people—they’re not all that different from heterosexual relationships. If you’re worried about the way you’re portraying your content, that’s something well-curated beta readers/testers (from the population you’re trying to represent) can help test for, and give feedback on. And on top of all of the above, that’s not to mention the potential issues associated with substituting in POC to replace queer people, which is perhaps not what your intention is, but is what it feels like your intention is (see Roast and Nines for all the ins and outs on why this is an issue). Ultimately, I stand by the opinion that on the most basic level, most will not be offended by a game that’s about a straight, cisgender female MC—yet some, or even many, may be off-put by such a game. I know I, personally, am. (P. S. Also consider that the MC has to interact with the other ROs that she isn’t romancing, as friends, enemies, acquaintances, what have you—having selectable ROs, for example, also allows the player to “diversify” their acquaintance group, if they so wish.) — Dani

I understand that this ask is coming from well-meaning intent but I would just like to state that writing characters of color is not easier than writing queer characters. One of them isn't a substitute for the other. Writing characters of color and writing queer characters are separate matters entirely, and both come with its own difficulties. Wanting your characters to be diverse, while admittedly lacking the perspective to back such identities, is still a murky water to navigate.

Personally speaking, and I really do have to be transparent about this, the way certain sentences were phrased in this ask rubbed me the wrong way. Still, I understand that this isn't malicious, just someone who is asking for guidance, which is something I can't fault. We all have to start somewhere, you know? That being said, if you really want to write diverse characters, my general advice is to do research. Lots and lots and lots of research. No author is exempt from that, honestly.

Find helpful articles, journals, studies, video essays, etc. to aid you in writing your characters. If you still feel like that's lacking in some way, which is a valid concern, being open to feedback from the appropriate people is also a good way to improve. The integrity of a project is important, but so is reasonable criticism against, for, or about it. Keep an open mind, educate yourself, and don't be afraid to ask for help or clarification should it be needed. — Nines

Nines says it well that queer people and poc are not interchangeable nor any 'easier' than the other. The fact that you're willing to do research and include characters of color yet not include queer characters tells me that you're afraid yet misconstruing how much effort actually gets put into cultural research.

There is a 'purity culture' that goes around tumblr that claims that diverse characters have to be perfect, have to have no flaws, cannot die, cannot have trauma, cannot face adversity, they must be perfect and good and happy.

I think this is bullshit.

I also think the backlash from this 'purity culture' community is what is creating so much fear in authors (including queer authors!!) in making characters with different backgrounds and identities than their own. In making queer characters with flaws and tragedy and negative characteristics.

If we only ever wrote what we knew, what we've personally experienced, fiction would be a very boring world.

Being afraid of representing a community wrong is a valid fear, but it shouldn't stop you from trying. You can write what you want to write, but it shouldn't be limited by fear.

Do your research. Get sensitivity readers. Be open to feedback. Be willing to be afraid, but do it anyway.

If, in the end, you decide to gender lock, make it an informed decision at the very least, and if you are including characters of color, know that that is a heavy amount of research too, and should be handled with the same care as what we've said on queer characters.

And like we've said before, we are not the voice of the community, we cannot give you permission or our blessing or flawless feedback, we are just five people running a blog. — Roast

Alright this was already mentioned a bit before but I wish to add my two cents: M/F relationships are the norm anywhere else in real life, and if you feel like there's no space for you and your relationships in a mostly-queer community then you might want to recheck if this is the community you wish to have as your target audience.

No one's going to be offended if your story is cishet, as we said, but you are extremely reducing your audience by doing such. The appeal of interactive fiction is that a good bunch of us have played female-mc-straight-love-interest visual novels in the past, having to endure being misgendered or romancing people we might not be attracted to.

The current interactive fiction community we're trying to promote has opened a million doors for everyone to explore themselves, so don't be surprised if your story, no matter how good, is ignored due to this aspect. Most of us have no interest in being forced to play as something we're not.

Again, we cannot tell you what you can or cannot do. We don't speak for the community, we speak for ourselves and for this blog. Maybe every comment we've made was incorrect and your game turns out to be successful, really, but it's what we believe you should keep in mind. — Cruz

Honestly, I don’t have much to add since everyone here mentioned and discussed important facets of this ask! At the end of the day, we are not a group who can or will ever dictate what you can or cannot write. That is not the purpose of the blog or the reason why we’re working as hard as we are.

There have always been games with this specific set of characteristics: gender locked MCs and/or ROs. Some people may enjoy it, others may not, for whatever reason.

Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee anything in terms of how people will respond to a game, because people will react to content differently. All we can do is offer our perspective and the potential things that may happen in the future based on the experience the lovely devs above have had. (fellow interact-if mods, my beloved ❤️)

It’s always admirable for people to reach out when they’re unsure, and I’m sure there are infinitely more opinions that vary or are similar to the ones in this response. But there you have it, some of our thoughts!

Goodluck with your project! — Mars

#interact-if asks #anonymous #long post

73 notes · View notes

number5theboy · 5 years ago

Note

Please elaborate on how Five could've turned into the most insufferable character to watch

Thanks for asking me to elaborate on this text post:

@tessapercygranger, @waywardd1 and @margarita-umbrella also wanted to see a more detailed version of it, and I ended up writing an essay that’s longer than some of my actual academic essays. So buckle up.

WHY NUMBER FIVE SHOULD BE THE MOST OBNOXIOUS CHARACTER IN TV HISTORY, AND HOW HE MANAGES NOT TO BE

Number Five: The Concept That Could Go Horribly Wrong

Alright, let’s first look at Five in theory in an overarching way, without taking into account the execution of the show. The basic set-up of the character, of course, is being a 58-year-old consciousness in a teenager’s body, due to a miscalculation in time travel. Right off the bat, Five is bar none the most overpowered of the siblings; by the end of Season 2, no one has yet been able to defeat him in a fight. He is a master assassin – and not just any master assassin, but the best one there is – and a survival expert, able to do complex maths and physics without the aid of a calculator, shown to have knowledge of half a dozen languages, has very developed observational skills and, to top that all off, he can manipulate time and space to the point where he can literally erase events that happened and change the course of history. And Five knows how skilled he is; he is arrogant, self-assured and sarcastic, and his streak of goodness is buried deep inside. David Castañeda once described Five in an interview as 90% chocolate with a cherry in the middle, meaning that you have to get through a lot of darkness and bitterness before knowing there is a good core, and I think it’s an excellent metaphor. However, Five is also incredibly, fundamentally terrible at communicating with anyone, and, because he is the only one with time travel abilities, the character a lot of the actual plot - and the moving forward of it - centres around. Also he’s earnestly in love with a mannequin, who is pretty much a projection of his own consciousness that functions as a coping mechanism for all the trauma he has endured. All in all, this gives you a character who looks like a teenager, but with the smug superiority of a fifty-something, who a) is extremely skilled in many different things, b) has a superiority complex, is arrogant and vocal about it, and most of the superiority is expressed through cutting sarcasm, c) has one very hidden ounce of goodness that he is literally the worst at communicating to other human beings, d) is what moves the plot along but is also bad at talking to anyone else, meaning that the plot largely remains with him, and e) his love interest is essentially a projection of himself. Tell me that’s not a character who is destined to be just…obnoxious, annoying, egocentric, a necessary evil that one has to put up with to get through this show. There are so many elements of this characterisation that can and should easily make Five beyond insufferable, but the show manages to avoid it, and I’m putting this down to three aspects.

That Trick of Age and Appearance

Bluntly put, Five as a character would not work if he was anything else than an old man in a 13-year-old body. Imagine this character and all his skills and knowledge, but actually just…a teenager. Immediately insufferable. Same goes for him being around 30, like his siblings, all of which are stunted and traumatised by their father’s abuse. If Five, being comparatively unscathed by Reginald to the point where he explicitly does not want to be defined by his association with his father, were 30 like his siblings, it would just take the bite out of that plot point and also give him a lot less time in the apocalypse, reducing the impact it had on him as a person. And making Five his actual 58-year-old self would make him very similar to Reginald, at least on surface level, with the appearance and attitude. Five and Reginald are two fundamentally different people, but having one of the siblings being a senior citizen that’s dressed to the nines and bosses his siblings around in a relatively self-centred way does open up that parallel, and would take away from Five’s charm as a character. Because pairing the life experience of a 58-year-old with the appearance of a teenager gives you the best of both worlds. You get the other siblings (and a lot of the audience, from a glance in the tags of my gifsets) feeling protective and paternal about Five, but his age and experience also give the justifications for his many skills, his arrogance, in a way, and his ability to decimate a room full of people. It’s the very interesting and not new concept of someone dangerous with the appearance of something harmless, a child. This is also where Five’s singular outfit comes in. I know we like to clown on Five to get a new outfit, but I think what gets forgotten often is how effective this outfit is at making the viewer take him seriously. The preppy school uniform is the perfect encapsulation of the tension between old man in spirit and young teenager in appearance. The blazer, vest and especially the shirt and tie are quite formal, relatively grown up. They’re not something we, the audience, usually associate with a teenage boy wearing; it makes Five just a little bit more grown up. But there is also a reason characters in this show keep bringing up Five’s shorts and his socks, because those are not things that we associate with grown men wearing; they’re the unmistakably childish part of his school uniform. Take a moment and imagine Five wearing a hoodie or a t-shirt, jeans, and sneakers; would that outfit work for him as well as the uniform does? Would he be able to command the same kind of respect or seriousness as a character? I don’t think so; the outfit is a lot more pivotal in making Five believable than a lot of people give it credit for.

Writing Nuance

The other big building block in not making Five incredibly insufferable is the writing. Objectively speaking, I think Five is the most well-written, and, more importantly, most coherently written character on the show (which does have to do with the fact that the show’s events are all sequential for him), and his arc and personality remain relatively intact over the course of the two seasons. More to the point, a giant part of what makes Five bearable as a character is that he is allowed to fail. He is written to have high highs and low lows, big victories through his skills and his intelligence, but also catastrophic failures and the freedom to be wrong. His superior intellect and skillset are not the be-all end-all of the plot or his character, just something that influences both. His inability for communication has not (yet) been used to fabricate a contrived misunderstanding that derails the plot and left all of us seething; instead, it’s a characteristic that makes him fail to reconnect with the people he loves. This is a bit simplified, as he does find common ground with Luther, for example, but in general, a lot of the rift between Five and his siblings is that they can’t relate to his traumas and he does not understand the depth of Reginald’s abuse, which is an interesting conflict worth exploring. Another thing that really works in Five’s favour is that he is definitely written to be mean and sarcastic, but it is never driven to the point of complete unlikability, and a lot of the time, the context makes it understandable why he reacts the way he does. Most of the sarcastic lines he gets are actually funny, that certainly helps, but in general, Five is a good example of a bearable character whose default personality is sharp and relatively cold, because it is balanced out with many moments of vulnerability. Delores is incredibly important for this in the first season, she is the main focus of Five’s humanising moments, and well-written as she totes the line between clearly being a coping mechanism for an extremely traumatised man and still coming across to the viewer as the human contact Five needs her to be. In the second season, the vulnerability is about his guilt for his siblings, it’s about Five connecting a little bit better to them. There’s also his relationship with the Commission and the Handler specifically – which honestly could be an essay on its own – that deserves a mention, because the Handler is why Five became the man he is, and this dynamic between creator and creation is explored in a very interesting way – their scenes are some of the most well-written in the entire show. And TUA never falls into the trap of making Five a hero, he is always morally ambiguous at best, and it just makes for an interesting, multi-faceted character, well-written character, and none of the characteristics that should make him unlikeable are allowed to take centre-stage for long enough to be defining on their own. I know a lot of people especially champion the scenes where Five goes apeshit, but without his more nuanced characterisation, if he was like that all the time, those scenes would not hit as hard.

Aidan Gallagher’s Performance is Underrated

But honestly, none of the above would matter that much if the Umbrella Academy didn’t luck out hard with the casting of Aidan Gallagher. I think what he achieves as an actor in this show is genuinely underappreciated. Like, the first season set out to cast six adults having to deal with various ramifications of childhood trauma, and a literal child that had to be able to act smart and wise beyond his years, seamlessly integrate into a family of adults while seeming like an adult, traumatised by the literal end of the world, AND had to be able to create the romantic chemistry of a thirty-year-long marriage with a lifeless department store doll. The only role I could think of to compare is Kirsten Dunst in Interview with a Vampire, where she plays a vampire child who, because she is undead, doesn’t age physically, but does mentally, so she’s 400 in a child’s body. And Kirsten Dunst had to do that for a two-hour movie. Five is a main character in a show that spans 20 episodes now. That’s insane, and it’s a risk. Five is a character that can’t be allowed to go wrong; if you don’t buy Five as a character, the entire first season loses believability. And they found someone who could do that not only convincingly, but also likeably. As I said, he is incredibly helped by the costuming department and the script, but Aidan Gallager’s Five has so much personality, he’s threatening and funny and charming and arrogant and heartbreaking. He has the range to be convincing in the quiet moments where Five’s humanity comes to show and in the moments where Five goes completely off the rails. Most child actors act with other children, but he is the only child in the main cast, and holds his own in scenes with adults not as a child, but as an adult on equal footing with the other adult characters. That’s not something to be taken for granted. But even apart from the fact that it’s a child actor who carries a lot of the plot and the drama of a series for adults, Aidan Gallagher’s portrayal of Five is also just so much fun. The comedic timing is on point, he has the dramatic chops for the serious scenes, the mannerisms and visual ticks add to the character rather than distract from him, and his line deliveries, paired with his physical acting, make Five arrogant and smug but never outright malicious and unlikeable. It’s just some terrific acting that really does justice to the character as he is written, but the writing would not be as strong if it wasn’t delivered and acted out the way Aidan Gallagher does. He is an incredible asset for this show.

Alright, onto concluding this rambling. If you made it this far, I commend you, and thank you for it. The point of all of this is that Five, as a character, could have been an unmitigated disaster of a TV character. He is overpowered, arrogant, uncommunicative and could so easily have been either unconvincing or completely unlikeable, but he turned out to be neither. It’s a combination of choices in the costume department, decisions in the writing room, and Aidan Gallagher’s acting skills that make the things that should make him obnoxious and annoying incredibly entertaining, and I hope you liked my long-winded exploration of these. Some nuance was lost along the way, but if I had not stopped myself, this would’ve become a full-blown thesis.

#thanks for the ask again #TUA #The Umbrella Academy #Five Hargreeves #tua s2 spoilers #my meta #i guess #Replies #Anonymous

910 notes · View notes

hanadolphieron · 5 years ago

Text

different sexualities/genders and usage of pronouns~

author’s note- if any of this information is incorrect or offends anyone, please feel free to pop into my inbox or dm me to let me know and i will fix it asap! also, if you have any identities to add, dm/send an ask about their description and i will do some research and then add it to this post!

_________

there are so many different sexualities, genders, pronouns, and identities in this world, and i know that sometimes it can be confusing. this is meant to help explain a few of them!

_________

SEXUALITIES

homosexual- a person sexually and/or romantically attracted to people of the same gender as them.

lesbian- a woman (whether intersex, cisgender or transgender) who is sexually and/or romantically attracted to women. lesbian is can be an umbrella term for all gender identities who are attracted to women.

he/him lesbian- a person who uses he/him pronouns but is still a homosexual woman.

they/them lesbian- a woman or nonbinary person who uses they/them pronouns and is sexually and/or romantically attracted to women.

gay- a man (whether intersex, cisgender or transgender) who is sexually and/or romantically attracted to men. this term is also used at times by people of other sexualities within the LGBTQ+ community who are attracted to the same sex as a slang. for example, many bisexual women use the phrase “i’m so gay” whenever they see a woman they’re attracted to, even if they’re technically a bisexual, and not a gay. this term includes people who use different pronouns but still identify as men, or do not identify with a specific gender but are attracted to men.

bisexual- a person who is sexually and/or romantically to multiple gender identities, but not all genders. for example, a women being attracted to women, men, and nonbinary folks. a common misconception is that bisexuals are only attracted to men and women, not any other identities. this is not true for all people, just some. another misconception is that bisexuals are transphobic, which is the untruest of all untruths, because not only is that implying that transgender peeps are not the gender that they identify with. it also implies that attraction is the only form of respect, along with being incorrect, as many bisexuals are attracted to transgender peeps. sometimes bisexual is an umbrella term which people use even if they are attracted to more than one gender, whether that be some or all. bisexuality can be divided into two categories- attraction to same and unsame genders.

pansexual- a person who is sexually and/or romantically to all gender identities. sometimes people prefer to describe themselves as pansexual if they base attraction off something different than gender entirely. some people who are attracted to all genders still use the term bisexual- this is just a preference.

asexual- a person who does not feel attracted to the idea of sex and/or are repulsed by it. asexuals can still experience romantic attractions, they just don’t desire people sexually. asexuals can still have sex, watch porn, or engage in sexual activities, it just doesn’t give them the same thrill as it does for non-asexuals. some asexuals may not feel no sexual attraction at all for some gender identities, but be sexually attracted to others.

demisexual- a person who does not feel sexual attraction to a person unless they have formed a strong emotional bond with them first. demisexuals may not feel sexual attraction to all genders, and may only need an emotional bond with some gender identities to experience sexual attraction.

queer- a term that refers to people who do not identify with any particular sexuality label and/or reject cultural norms surrounding sexuality. this term can be used if you are unsure of your sexuality, but know that they are not heterosexual. it is also an umbrella term that spans all sexual identities within the LGBTQ+ community. people with complicated sexual identities often use this term because explaining themselves becomes exhausting after a while. nonbinary peeps use this term because some terms, like lesbian and gay, would be inaccurate if they used them. however, they can still use those terms. they’re cool like that :)

panromantic- someone who experiences romantic attraction to all genders. someone could be panromantic but also a lesbian if they are able to experience romantic attraction to all gender identities but only sexual attraction to women.

aromantic- someone who does not experience romantic attraction

omniromantic- someone who experiences romantic attraction to all genders, but has a distinction or preference between them. for example, feeling attracted to nonbinary peeps but also women, however preferring nonbinary peeps and feeling a different sense of attraction between those two identities.

biromantic- someone who experiences romantic attraction to two or more genders, but not all genders.

pluralian- a term that refers to anyone who experiences romantic and/or sexual attraction to more than one gender.

viramoric- a nonbinary peep who is attracted exclusively to men.

enbian- a nonbinary peep who is exclusively attracted to fellow non-binary peeps.

feminamoric- a nonbinary peep who is exclusively attracted to women.

polyamorous- a person who has the capability or desire to be in relationships with more than one person. polyamorous people can have any sexuality.

_________

GENDER IDENTITIES

transgender- a term that describes people who do not identify with the gender assigned to them with at birth. this might be confusing for some, but basically, your genitalia do not determine what gender you feel on the “inside” or identify with. for example, a woman who has a penis is still a woman, and you can not say they are not.

cisgender- a term that describes people who identify with the gender assigned to them at birth.

nonbinary- someone who does not identify with being a man or a woman. some nonbinary people can identify with being one of those two genders in part, just not completely. nonbinary humans can also be transgender.

stellarian nonbinary- someone who is nonbinary and neutrally aligned, and does not lean towards being a man or a woman, however they still identify with having a gender

solarian nonbinary- someone who is nonbinary and male-aligned, and partly identifies with being a man

lunarian nonbinary- someone who is nonbinary and female-aligned, meaning they partly identify with being a woman

nebularian nonbinary- a mix of lunarian and stellarian nonbinary

novarian nonbinary- a mix of solarian and stellarian nonbinary

*the above genders in bullet points are according to the galactian alignment system

agender- someone who does not identify with a gender, or is genderless.

gender queer- a term for people who do not have a normative gender or prefer not to have a certain gender identity.

genderfluid- someone whose gender changes over time. this could be day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month, on an inconsistent schedule, etc.

intersex- a term for someone who is born with physical characteristics that can not be classified as male or female.

_________

PRONOUNS

they/them- someone who prefers to be referred to as they/them

she/her- someone who prefers to be referred to as she/her

he/him- someone who prefers to be referred to as he/him

*any combination of they/them, she/her, and he/him is possible and can be interchangeable. for example, genderfluid people may use he/him one day and then prefer she/her the next. some people may prefer more than one set of pronouns. some examples of this- he/they and she/they

_________

i know, this can be a lot to take in and it can be worry to use the correct pronouns, but most people won’t be mad unless you purposefully mean to offend them.

asking considerate questions is appreciated if you don’t understand someone’s identity :)

if someone says they’re pansexual while also being lesbian and gay at the same time, just go with it, it’s none of your business and who cares?

have a nice day everyone! love you all!!! <3

#lgbtq #lgbt #lgbtqa #human rights #activism #social justice #what the heck do i tag this with #merope

59 notes · View notes

that-scouse-wizard · 4 years ago

Text

David Willows MK 2

A/N: Just an updated version of David’s profile, complete with a few changes and a more in-depth description of certain characteristics. Hope you guys enjoy and if you’d like your MC to be friends with him, message me and let’s chat about it.

Some more things to note:

-Merula is not the mole.

-I’m using the female version of Rowan as David’s best friend because to hell with game restrictions. Also, she survives, at least... David’s Rowan does.

-Drastic alteration to the Quidditch storyline. Skye is in David’s year and a Gryffindor. Orion, Murphy and Erika are two years above David and are in Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw and Slytherin respectively. Also including Andre and Charlie while introducing Oliver Wood and Lee Jordan.

-It goes without saying but spoilers for my ideas. Some are kept deliberately vague and some aren’t covered entirely more so because I intend to write about it someday. Let me know what you guys think of those that are given though.

-------------

General Information

Name: David Owen Willows (Formerly David Owen Hall, changed to mother’s maiden name in 1982).

Gender: Male

Age: 11-18 (1984-91), 19-25 (1992-98)

DOB: 30/03/1973

Species: Human

Blood status: Half-blood

Sexuality: Straight

Alignment: Chaotic Good

Ethnicity: White-British

Nationality: English (maternal side of family is Irish, paternal grandmother is Scottish, paternal grandfather and father are English).

Residence: Liverpool/ Lancaster (during his Hogwarts years and depending upon who he’s staying with).

Wimborne (during his career as a pro Quidditch player)

Hogsmeade (final place of residence after becoming Charms professor)

Myers Briggs Personality Type: ENFP, The Campaigner

Character summary: Though he may come across as stand-offish at first, David Willows is a friend as loyal as he is bull-headed. A student of Erika Rath, he became known as Hound on the Quidditch pitch for his relentless pursuit of opposing players. A skill in duelling and the muggle martial art of muay thai (also a pair of knuckledusters) ensures David is a formidable opponent with or without magic.

Personality:

Aggressive: While he tries to reign in his anger, David is known to have a short temper when it comes to certain taunts. Chief amongst them, comparing him to Jacob. In his early years he was even willing to physically fight much older students despite the clear difference in both size and strength.

Aloof: For all of his first year and a good portion of his second year, David isn’t the one to initiate a friendship (except for Chiara but that was when there was no one else to really talk to while spending a night in the Hospital Wing due to the Devil’s Snare incident). However, while undergoing his first time as a quidditch player, he’s taught by Penny how to be a bit more social at pre and post-match parties.

Artistic: David was taught by his mother Rue to draw in greyscale sketches, something he improves on during his time throughout Hogwarts. In the midst of Jacob’s disappearance, his parent’s divorce and especially the stress that comes at Hogwarts, drawing provided an escape for him. His favourite things to draw are people and creatures.

Competitive: This aspect of David tends to come out the most when it comes to sport. With Erika as his mentor, he nurtures a healthy sense of competition as well as a determination to best the other houses and put Hufflepuff on top when it comes to quidditch.

Courageous: Largely as a result of his loyalty, David is willing to throw himself headlong into danger. The Sorting Hat didn’t nearly put him in Gryffindor for no reason.

Determined: When David sets his mind to a goal, he wants to accomplish it to the best of his abilities. In the case of finding Jacob however, it led to a sort of tunnel-vision, one that was finally broken when Chauncy and Philip succumb to injuries sustained under the sleepwalking curse.

Empathetic: Throughout his years at Hogwarts, David starts to empathise with people in his life. Even in the case of Merula, he sees how lonely she must really be and tries to reach out to her on numerous occasions. If he doesn’t fully understand it, he’d like you to share your feelings with him, at your own behest of course.

Loyal: In spite of a prickly exterior at first, once you win David’s loyalty, he’ll return it ten-fold. The type of friend who would take a bullet for you.

Snarky: David has a sharp tongue, preferably he tries to shut down an argument with his wits. Only going for duelling when he feels it necessary. That being said, he isn’t shy about getting petty in a verbal spar, for example his response to Merula when first being taunted about Jacob supposedly teaming up with Voldemort: “At least that’s just a rumour, can’t say the same about your parents.”

Stubborn: A self-described ‘stubborn git’, David is quite notorious for not budging from his position once he thinks he has all the facts he needs. If he’s being especially difficult, just get Merula.

Appearance

Face Claim: Dave Franco (as an adult at least).

Voice Claim: Paul McCartney.

Game appearance:

Physique: Athletic, broad shouldered and fairly bulky as a result of weight training with Erika.

Hair Colour: Dark Brown

Hair style: Chin-length (1st-2nd year), crew cut (3rd-4th year), short but long enough to slick back (5th year-present).

Eye colour: Dark brown.

Height: 5′11″ (as of 6th year)

Weight: Approx 80kg (when fully grown)

Scarring: A few small ones sustained during duels and the occasional mishap in quidditch, mostly on his upper body with a few on his legs. Sustains a burn scar on the left side of his waist during the battle with R.

Body modifications: Get’s the phrase “You’ll never walk alone.” tattooed on his right bicep at eighteen. Later gets a ram skull tattoo on his upper back just between the shoulder blades at age twenty. Finally, gets a shepherd crook just below the ram skull tattoo at age twenty-one.

Inventory: His wand, a pair of knuckledusters, a sketchbook, a pencil case containing stationary.

Fashion: He trusts Andre’s advice on what looks good on him though knows what works for him and what doesn’t. Partly influenced by his musical tastes (mainly punk, and rock and roll), has a love of leather jackets and slightly ripped jeans.

Background/ History:

Pre-Hogwarts:

-David was born in Liverpool, living in the suburb of Allerton. One of his favourite things to do was play football with Jacob and his dad.

-His mum would teach him to draw, most often on rainy days.

-Close to both of his parents as a result but it all changed when Jacob disappeared. He knew Jacob and his parents had arguments after being expelled but hadn’t heard any of it on account of the use of a muffling charm. Furthermore, Rue and Matthew were driven apart, Matthew blaming Jacob’s change in attitude and eventual disappearance on magic in its entirety.

-Sometime after Jacob disappeared and when the general shitshow stirred up by the Daily Prophet had died down, it was settled that Rue and Matthew would divorce. Given that David would go to Hogwarts as well, they thought it would be best for David to take Willows as his surname, hopefully not being recognised as Jacob Hall’s brother.

-This was fruitless, Rita Skeeter caught wind of the proceedings and sensationalised them, exposing the name change in the process. The stress and grief caused both parents to distance themselves from David in some way. Rue threw herself into work and became even more strict with David’s freedom while Matthew just left.

-David however, was fighting his own battles, it became known at his muggle school about Jacob going missing as well as his parents divorcing. This caused him to become quite reclusive from his classmates and would lash out at anyone who said a bad word towards him, especially if it concerned his family drama. He lost any friends he did have and refused to make any more.

During Hogwarts

-Year 1: He first meets Rowan, even being introduced to her younger brother, Alder (basically male Rowan).

David, Rowan, Tonks, Diego, Chiara and Penny first begin to form what becomes known as the Hufflesquad.

Also befriends Ben and Charlie.

Angelica Cole takes him under her wing despite not being in the same house and even shows David a group of trolls she’s been tending to in preparation for her apprenticeship in training security trolls.

Meets the Booths during the Christmas break and despite a rocky start, begins to develop a positive relationship with them even coming to an understanding with his dad.

During one of his expeditions with Angelica, he’s confronted by Needle, an acromantula that previously belonged to Jacob.

Finally stands up to his mum properly, resulting in him staying with the Booths for the summer in Lancaster.

-Year 2: David meets those who are involved in the Quidditch scene at Hogwarts, including Erika Rath, who he briefly develops a crush on until he’s let down gently at the end of Year 2.

He duels Merula for a second time, winning once more, which makes her cry albeit in private. This then results in having his first encounter with Barnaby Lee, who confronts David about upsetting Merula. David tries to get past but Barnaby wraps his hands around David’s throat. Not actually choking him mind, more to get his attention. David panics as it reminds him of the Devil’s Snare that wrapped around his throat and lashes out at Barnaby.

David puts Barnaby in the hospital wing, much to the anger of Liz Tuttle.

The last Quidditch match for the House Cup between Hufflepuff and Slytherin is interrupted by the spread of the cursed ice. Ultimately resulting in Gryffindor’s victory in the cup for that year.

Rue comes back, mentioning how Corey Hayden (David’s American cousin in this AU) would like to transfer to Hogwarts.

Year 3: Amelia comes to Hogwarts as a first year and gets sorted into Hufflepuff. Similarly, Alder starts at Hogwarts and is sorted into Ravenclaw.

Amelia brings Dusty, her cat, along with her. However, Dusty goes missing shortly after arriving at the castle.

Later, in a COMC class, Barnaby mentions that he found a cat matching Dusty’s description. Initially, David is very suspicious to the extent of threatening Barnaby if he harmed Dusty in any way. Barnaby refutes this and returns Dusty to him unharmed, causing David to apologise for both for the accusation and the events that happened last year. Eventually, he even befriends Barnaby.

In a similar vein, when tending to some of his creatures on the reserve, he bumps into Liz and winds up introducing her to Needle. The two get a friendship going, David admiring Liz’s passion for creatures and Liz appreciating David for not finding her weird when she rambles about animals. To the extent that they go out on a few dates.

Close to the end of the year, he rants at Merula. Effectively asking the question of why she seems to hate him. Yet despite the rant he closes off with how he understands Merula, he’s been that lonely kid lashing out at the world and it’s not fun. Despite her reluctance to admit it, Merula knows David is right.

He gets the chance to verbally unload on Rita Skeeter for the articles she wrote about his family when she comes to the school looking to interview an interesting student. Later, several of his friends plus Merula of all people step in to put Skeeter in her place when she successfully provokes him into a fit of rage to make him look bad. The situation is eventually diffused by McGonagall.

Year 4:

Corey officially transfers to Hogwarts from Ilvermorny after exchanging letters with David throughout third year.

Though David wasn’t particularly close to them, Chauncy and Philip (two of his dormmates alongside Diego) succumb to injuries sustained when they were attacked by a red cap under the Sleepwalking curse. When he learns the truth of what attacked them, David slays the creature.

David starts to realise he has a crush on Merula after assisting her in casting Expecto Patronum. Later in the year, he takes her out on a date to Hogsmeade, gets her a songbook for Christmas and even takes her out to the Celestial Ball.

Merula’s parents are freed from Azkaban by R, her mother even meeting Merula in secret throughout the year. During one of their meet-ups, she has a hunch Merula is starting to develop a crush on David (something which is true but not something she would admit it at the time).

In order to eliminate this apparent threat to her family’s blood purity, she asks Merula to bring him to her in the Forbidden Forest under the guise of allowing the two of them to join R like she has. Instead, she subdues David with Petrificus Totalus, attempting to convince Merula to leave him, that David isn’t worth it.

Merula sides with David even though it pains her initially. David stays with her over the summer, where they try to figure out... whatever the hell their relationship is at the moment.

Year 5: Throughout this year he dates Merula in secret until Valentine’s Day. It’s here that she confesses she’s ready to have their relationship out in the open.

One of the most major event for David is Rakepick’s betrayal, he had actually grown fond of her as a mentor. Being stabbed in the back wasn’t a good thing for him.

The second is Jacob leaving immediately after David finds him. It’s hurtful and David becomes a bit reclusive for a while. Finally, he’s comforted by Bill, Orion and Erika, the older sibling figures in his life.

Year 6: Jacob returns, under the watchful eye of Alastor Moody, acting as the DADA teacher for that year. Naturally, there’s tension between the brothers, which eventually resolves.

Jacob does join David for the Christmas break, where he gets along well with the Booths and reunites with his parents.

As well as this, R attempts to come after Amelia, resulting in the death of Alder Khanna. As well as being a devastating loss, it causes a rough patch in David and Rowan’s relationship when in her grief she winds up shouting “I wish I’d never met you, David Willows!” She only realises what she just said when the words leave her mouth but regardless, it causes a fracture within David’s larger circle of friends.

Eventually, the time comes for when David, Jacob and their allies take on the vaults like they had always dreamed of. Together, they face off against the guardian of the Sunken vault, an Ammit (based on the creature of Ancient Egyptian Mythology). Eventually the beast is defeated and they claim the treasure of the vaults, what seems to be the base of a necklace.

In a celebration at the Three Broomsticks, R attacks and murders Jacob. This sends David spiralling into grief, hitting his truly lowest point. He worked so hard, he rebuilt his family at home and forged a new one at Hogwarts, all the while hoping Jacob would be able to join them. And what was it all for? Nothing.

Before the school year is up... he snaps his wand and runs away from Hogwarts. Not to Liverpool, not to Lancaster, just anywhere but there. It will keep his friends and family safe or so he reasons. Deep down though, he thinks it’s cowardly.

During this time, he finds his way to Glasgow and starts sleeping rough on the streets all the while battling with grief, anger and self loathing. This goes on for two months before Moody tracks him down, apparating him to a secluded area of the Scottish countryside, kicks his arse and talks him down. Taking him to Grimmauld Place afterwards with the intention of formulating a plan to take the fight to R.

Where he finds most of his remaining friends waiting for him. At first he staunchly refuses their help, feeling he’s already put enough people in danger. Yet they refuse to leave.

This is actually the moment where the Circle of Khanna is formed, this time named for Alder. Reconciling with Rowan after a serious heart-to-heart.

Year 7: ...Let’s just say R is going to regret setting David Willows on the warpath.

R’s destruction becomes widely regarded news, however David allows Moody to take the credit for it. Frankly, by this point he’s sick of any attachment to the Cabal and just wants to play Quidditch.

He’s able to pass his NEWTS and win the Quidditch cup for Hufflepuff one last time, resulting in him being offered the position as beater on the Wimborne Wasps.

Post-Hogwarts:

David and Merula work things out, moving in together. Though it’s odd with David still keeping at his Quidditch training and Merula now working for Gringotts as a curse-breaker. After winning the British and Irish League for the Wasps in 1993, he proposes to Merula which she accepts.

In 1994, they have a wedding in the summer time with Rowan being David’s best woman. They did plan on having kids until Cedric’s murder at the hands of Voldemort. With Quidditch cancelled and Merula being affiliated to Gringotts, both are approached to work for the Order.

Though initially very hesitant, David agrees. Eliminating Death Eaters, rescuing their hostages and even fighting in the Battle of Hogwarts.

He returns to the Quidditch scene when it starts up again in 1999, helping the Wasps win the cup three more times. 1999 is also the year in which Merula and David have their first kid, Robin. After the latest victory in 2002 he discovers Merula is pregnant again, and his retirement from Quidditch is looming on the horizon. He’s convinced by Judith Harris (@judediangelo75) to teach for a few weeks over the summer at KC’s (@kc-needs-coffee) quidditch summer camp. It’s here that he develops a love for teaching. Getting in touch with professor Flitwick to work as his assistant before becoming the Charms professor.

In early 2003, he welcomes his son Nicholas into the world.

Family

Matthew Hall (father):

Face Claim: Ben Miller

A stern but fair man and CIMA-qualified accountant originally from Yorkshire, Matthew met David’s biological mother Rue when he was on a business trip to Dublin in 1956. Encountering her in a quiet pub being told “I’ve dealt with a real dragon today” when he asked if she was okay on account of how tired she looked. Matthew took it as a joke but Rue was being entirely serious. They struck up a friendship and began dating, eventually getting married in 1961 and having Jacob in 1964.

initially, he was fascinated by the existence of the wizarding world but soon came to fear it after Jacob’s disappearance. Divorcing Rue afterwards and cutting off contact from David aside from agreeing to send child maintenance. However, after being chewed out by his girlfriend Lyra, he all but begs David to come visit him in Lancaster over Christmas in 1984.

The reason being that Amelia’s magical abilities finally began to manifest, which became a cause of conflict between David and Matthew, largely from David thinking that was the only reason he was invited. Eventually, they come to an understanding and try to work on improving their relationship.

Rue Willows (mother):

Face Claim: Fiona O’Carroll

A dragonologist from Dublin in the employ of the Dragon Research and Restraint Bureau. Though she was strict, she was generally attentive towards David, being the one who taught him to draw.

After Jacob’s disappearance however, she became very withdrawn and austere. It was her way of opting for a ‘tough love’ approach, thinking she had been too soft and in her misguidance tried to control David’s life. Even then, she still grieved, frequently getting into arguments with David about his behaviour at school, bringing up Jacob when David tried to make her proud of him and other such things.

During the start of the summer break between first and second year, David finally stands up to her properly. The words that get through to her are the following, “That stranger’s name is Lyra and she’s been a better mum to me in the weeks I’ve known her than you have for me in years.” and “I love you too mum... but I don’t know if I like you anymore.”

She does a lot of soul searching after that, staying with relatives in America for a year before coming back and promising to do better with her and David’s relationship.

Lyra Booth (nee Robinson) (step-mother):

Face Claim: Ruth Wilson

A muggle and CIMA-qualified accountant originally from London, left widowed in 1980 after her first husband, Peter died in a car accident. She met Matthew when working at an accounting firm in Lancaster shortly after his divorce from Rue. After a couple months of knowing each other, the two began dating, Lyra introduced him to her children, who he hit it off well with.

She knew he had a son who he sent child maintenance to but it wasn’t revealed until Amelia accidentally made a plant pot explode in a fit of frustration that Lyra learned the truth. Consequently... she blew up at Matthew for as good as abandoning as his son. Insisting on inviting him around for Christmas.

While David was prickly when he first came around, he eventually warmed up to her and the rest of the Booths, being a positive maternal influence on him.

Jacob Hall (brother) (deceased):

Face Claim: Tom Holland

David’s only biological sibling, a gifted though trouble-making student, first became interested in the cursed vaults during his first year when he was informed about the legend by seventh year Patricia Rakepick. In his sixth year, he stood up for fellow Gryffindor Angelica Cole when she was being bullied (at the time she was a first year).

His investigation into the vaults would put him into conflict with the mysterious cult known as R. A conflict that would put his family in danger and even cost him his life.

Alex Booth (step-brother):

Face Claim: Jody Latham

The eldest of the Booth siblings, Alex is a highly protective big brother and was worried upon realising his little sister was going to be part of a world none of them had any knowledge about. He tried to make David feel welcome despite the younger boy’s hostility.

When David attempted to run away during his first stay with the Booths, Alex caught him in the act and made a deal, get past him and he wouldn’t tell anyone he’d left. Though David was tenacious, Alex stopped him every time even pointing out the flaws in David’s technique if he tried to physically fight Alex. After David finally gave up, Alex didn’t breathe a word of his run away attempt to anyone. David would take up Alex’s offer to teach him muay thai during his first visit.

Sarah Booth (step-sister):

Face Claim: Emilia Clarke

The middle child of the Booth siblings and also the least welcoming, Sarah was most vocally against Amelia being part of the wizarding world. She treated David coldly at first, going on a grouse hunting trip with her friends the day after he arrived to stay with them for Christmas.

However, at some point, she caught him reading an old copy of a Shooting Times magazine and after some persuasion by Alex, took David clay pigeon shooting. Becoming quite impressed, and even a little endeared from how quickly he picked up shooting.

Amelia Booth (step-sister):

Face Claim: Maisie Williams

A muggleborn witch and the youngest of the Booth siblings, Amelia was surprised to realise she possessed magical abilities. Though was even more shocked to learn Matthew already knew about it.

When she was five years old, she was involved in the car accident that killed her father. Resulting in her being scarred with a gash on the right side of her forehead, a similar one on her left cheek and a larger one that cuts across from shoulder to her chest. Though she repressed the memory, she did indeed see her father die, thus Thestrals are visible to her. Another thing the accident did was give her motorphobia, though can tolerate it as long as she’s A) In control of the vehicle and B) It’s not motorised.

However, she does have a love of cycling, she was taught to do so by her dad before he died. Similarly, gymnastics helped her get some of her confidence back after the accident and still keeps up with it. A love of plants and animals prompts her to excel in Herbology and Potions, then later COMC.

Allegiances

Hogwarts House: Hufflepuff

Affiliations: The Circle of Khanna, The Wimborne Wasps, The Order of the Phoenix, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

Professions: Beater for the Wimborne Wasps (1991-95)

Agent of the Order of the Phoenix (1995 - 98)

Resumes position as beater for the Wasps (1999-2003)

Charms Assistant Teacher (2003 - 05)

Charms Teacher (2005 - present)

Hogwarts Information

Class Proficiencies:

Astronomy: E

Charms: O

DADA: O

Herbology: E

History of Magic: A

Potions: A

Transfiguration: E

Electives:

Care of Magical Creatures: A

Muggle Studies: O

Quidditch:

Hufflepuff Beater (1985 - 91)

Hufflepuff Captain (after Orion graduates) (1989 - 91)

Extra Curricular:

Duelling Club (Becomes known as one of the best duellers in Hogwarts)

Art Club

Football Club (Founder)

Apparition Class (in 1991)

Favourite Professors:

Professor Sprout, his head of house and someone he feels he can go to if he needs advice. One of several people who warned him about being careful with Patricia Rakepick.

Professor Mcgonagall, his Transfiguration teacher and head of Jacob’s house when he was at Hogwarts. Though they disagree entirely on him tackling the vaults, he always pays attention in her lessons as while she’s often stern she can be a great teacher.

Professor Flitwick, as his Charms teacher, David always found Flitwick to be respectable. David especially respects Flitwick for teaching him Expelliarmus, even after he was honest in what he intended to do with it (i.e. use it in a duel against Merula). Also came for Flitwick’s help in developing Cometa.

Least Favourite Professors:

Professor Binns: Finds his droning entirely too boring and really only passed History of Magic thanks to Rowan.

Every other professor he’s either neutral on (Snape and Trelwany) or he likes but aren’t his favourites (Kettleburn).

Best Canon friends:

Rowan Khanna

Diego Caplan

Nymphadora Tonks

Penny Haywood

Chiara Lobosca

(David plus the above five make up the original members of the Hufflesquad)

Bill Weasley

Charlie Weasley

Erika Rath

Orion Amari

Badeea Ali

Barnaby Lee

Liz Tuttle

Love interest:

Erika Rath (crush)

Nymphadora Tonks (first kiss)

Liz Tuttle (dated briefly in third year but broke things off fairly amicably when they realised they were developing crushes on other people).

Merula Snyde (began dating in fourth year, later marries David in 1994)

Best MC friends:

Judith Harris (@judediangelo75): The closest of his MC friends, David and Judith first get acquainted by being pushed into friendship... somewhat subtly by Penny Haywood. Both of them catch on when Penny mentions they should try out for the Quidditch team. Both of them still go for it, bonding over a shared love of martial arts and proving they have the potential to be fearsome beaters.

Throughout their time at Hogwarts, David and Judith would demonstrate a fierce loyalty to each other, being as close as siblings. David even becoming godfather to her children, Bakari and Kendrick.

Cato Reese (@catohphm): David was first introduced to Cato by Penny. The two find themselves sharing very similar values, having a great love their friends and absolute ruthlessness towards their enemies.

Like anyone involved in the Quidditch scene at Hogwarts, David has a bit of a rivalry with him. Tending to trash talk him (though with no real weight behind it), Cato understands that David doesn’t mean it.

Katriona Cassiopea (KC) (@kc-needs-coffee): The two of them are sports fanatics, they could talk to each other for hours about Quidditch. While David definitely knows more about footy, he’s eager to learn about any sport, such as baseball which KC is highly knowledgeable about.

KC would be one of the first to jump at the football matches David organises during his time at Hogwarts.

Lizzie Jameson (@lifeofkaze): Like David, Lizzie is an avid fan of LFC. Even meeting up at some point with their respective partners to watch a footy match at Anfield, where Liverpool were playing.

On the quidditch pitch, Lizzie is a chaser and knows she can count on David to keep the bludgers off her back.

If any of your MCs would want to be friends with David, let me know!

Rivals:

Merula Snyde (For most of his time at Hogwarts).

During Quidditch: Erika Rath, Skye Parkin, Andre Egwu, Charlie Weasley, Angelica Cole, Oliver Wood, Cato Reese and Katriona Cassiopea.

Enemies:

R (including Patricia Rakepick, Fenrir Greyback and Peter Pettigrew).

The Snyde family (minus Merula)

Voldemort

Death Eaters

Magical Abilities

1st Wand: Blackthorn, unicorn hair core, ten and a quarter inches, slightly springy and flexible. Snaps it in half shortly just before the end of sixth year, citing, “What kind of warrior can’t even protect his own brother?”

Blackthorn, which is a very unusual wand wood, has the reputation, in my view very well-merited, of being best suited to a warrior.

Unicorn hair generally produces the most consistent magic, and is least subject to fluctuations and blockages. Wands with unicorn cores are generally the most difficult to turn to the Dark Arts. They are the most faithful of all wands, and usually remain strongly attached to their first owner, irrespective of whether he or she was an accomplished witch or wizard. Minor disadvantages of unicorn hair are that they do not make the most powerful wands (although the wand wood may compensate) and that they are prone to melancholy if seriously mishandled, meaning that the hair may ‘die’ and need replacing.

2nd Wand: English Oak, Dragon Heartstring core, twelve and a half inches, unbending.

A wand for the good times and bad, this is a friend as loyal as the wizard who deserves it. Wands of English Oak demand partners of strength, courage and fidelity. Obtained from Garrick Ollivander while being accompanied by Alastor Moody.

As a rule, dragon heartstrings produce wands with the most power, and which are capable of the most flamboyant spells. Dragon wands tend to learn more quickly than other types. While they can change allegiance if won from their original master, they always bond strongly with the current owner. The dragon wand tends to be easiest to turn to the Dark Arts, though it will not incline that way of its own accord. It is also the most prone of the three cores to accidents, being somewhat temperamental.

Animagus form: A ram, specifically of a Dalesbred Sheep. Rams symbolise determination, initiative and leadership, factors that are put to the test more than once during his time at Hogwarts.

Misc magical abilities: Legilimens, Rue informs him of potentially inheriting her legilimens ability between third year and fourth year when he tells her of his delve into the Vault of Fear. David prefers not using it on people, rather using it to see through the eyes of animals as his great grandfather Reuben used to do.

Occlumency: Snape, at Dumbledore’s behest begins teaching David the art of Occlumency in fifth year.

Non-verbal magic: David began learning the non-verbal use of magic in fifth year thanks to professor Flitwick. Becoming highly skilled in it by his seventh year.

Spell creation: Assists in the creation of Stella Cascadia alongside Badeea Ali. Given how dangerous the vaults could be, he begins to work on another spell inspired by Stella Cascadia alongside several of his friends, Cometa, the comet jinx.

Boggart Form: Initially, Jacob as a death eater after hearing about the rumours of him taking Voldemort’s side.

From year four onwards, himself as a dark wizard as he worries about the path the vaults will set him on.

Riddikulus Form: Death eater Jacob’s mask turns into a pie that promptly splats him in the face.

Later, his dark wizard self in the uniform of Everton Football Club with a blue clown nose and wig to match. Since he’s a Liverpool Football Club supporter, seeing himself in one his rival team’s colours as a clown is hilarious to him.

Amortentia (what do they smell like?): A sea breeze and heather.

Amortentia (what do they smell?): Freshly mown grass and clear air after a rainfall.

Patronus: African wild dog, a symbol of his loyalty and relentless pursuit of his goals.

Patronus memory: -Attending the LFC vs Nottingham Forest semi final match of the Football League Cup at Anfield on the 12th February 1980 with his dad and Jacob. They drew 1-1 and LFC didn’t get through to the final but David was still happy to be there with both them.

Mirror of Erised: Jacob being back, alongside all of his friends and family. All of them are safe and well.

Specialised/ favourite spells:

Cometa, a spell that David creates in sixth year with the help of Badeea Ali, Rowan Khanna, Merula Snyde, Diego Caplan and professor Flitwick. Inspired by Stella Cascadia, and using some principles from the Ice Jinx, the spell initially creates cricket ball-sized pieces of ice that explode into a mist when they impact against something. This makes it especially useful for blinding or disorienting a target. Later they develop the more-powerful Cometa Maxima in seventh year. Its main limitations are maintaining eye contact directed at the target (as is the case for all jinxes) and its general range is quite short (about twenty five feet) due to the “comet” (really a mix of ice, dust and gases) disintegrating quite quickly.

Protego Diabolica, A spell taught to him by Felix Rosier in sixth year, nothing says “Get away from my friends!” Like a massive wall of blue flame that incinerates enemies and leaves allies unharmed.

Expelliarmus, the Disarming charm taught to David by Professor Flitwick in first year is one of his go-to spells when duelling.

Protego, learned in order to protect himself from spells and other projectiles.

Healing spells: Largely taught to him by Chiara throughout their time at Hogwarts, healing spells have come in handy more than once when he needs to preserve his own or his friend’s lives.

Expecto Patronum, though niche, a spell that can get rid of a dementor is nothing to scoff at. Plus it’s a sentimental reminder of his friendship with Tonks.

Incendio, good as a fire-starter and a duelling spell, also reminds him of a time when Merula stood up to Rita Skeeter for him by burning her camera.

Misc Information

-David is a huge supporter of Liverpool Football Club (LFC), so much so one of his casuals is a club uniform.

-As well as Needle, David has other creatures on the reserve, Lucky (Knarl), Clop (Porlock), Bonita (fairy), Mori (thestral), and Chen (Chinese fireball).

#harry potter hogwarts mystery #hphm #jacob's sibling #david willows #hphm mc

15 notes · View notes

briarthorne · 4 years ago

Note

Yes, Cids yes. I mean, there are people shopping Blithe X Ezra or Izumi X Ezra so how about we shift it and make it Cids X Ezra versus/or Dior X Crusher! 😏

ALRIGHT.

Cids x Ezra vs. Galactic Disasters!

Zeg Cids x Ezra Vanto

So, this ship is a bit random, tbh.

Well, let's start off with Cids's characteristics since I know him better than Ezra. Cids is the kind of person who will prioritize both of your needs equally. He was raised in a caring home with 4 dads and those dads showed him what healthy relationships are. Ezra is a person who is mischievous and likes to steal and con people. He didn't have a nice background growing up and living in space basically toughened him like a rock.

Their compatibility is like water and oil. Both of them will disagree with a lot of things, especially when Ezra steals. Zeg doesn't like stealing. Zeg would probably try and correct Ezra's bad habits (unlike Izumi) and try to change him for the better. But Ezra doesn't want to be better. He was fine the way he is and he doesn't want to change himself for a lover.

But there are also some recipes that could need both oil and water. Zeg would comfort Ezra in whatever way he can and whatever way possible when he's sad. He would do anything to make sure his lover is happy and healthy emotionally, physically, and mentally. Ezra would practically fight anyone for Zeg because Zeg is too soft to fight other civilians.

They're the couple who will argue about the other's lifestyle but will have each other's back, no matter what.

Galactic Disasters

Babies. Absolutely. Precious babies.

Anyway, Darington Dior, also known as a reckless bastard who only thinks about himself. He's got childhood trauma, a shit attitude, and a lack of self-preservation. The perfect recipe for a misunderstood villain. Crusher Vanto is a sweet kid coming from an abusive family, then got adopted by aliens and was given supernatural powers, then went back to Earth and dealt with hard relationships. Sounds like the perfect protagonist.

Darington and Crusher had crappy birth parents but lead different paths. Crusher was lucky enough to be raised in a loving home and gain abilities while Darington spiraled down a slide of unhealthy coping habits and developed a sense of apathy towards romance.

Darington can and will hurt Crusher in more ways than one. He wasn't a good lover to Stripes nor was he to Izumi, so how good can he be with Crusher? And with Darington's life goals being entirely different than Crusher's, that could lead to arguments. Crusher needs someone emotional, someone, that could relate to him and at the same time, teach him how to better treat himself. Darington is the least emotion-sensitive person out there, so, oof.

However, Darington being with Crusher forces him to adjust. With Crusher's powers being acted upon by emotion, Darington had to tread carefully and be sensitive for once in his lifetime. Darington helps Crusher with his self-worth and even if he gets hurt, that's just part of the experience.

Aaand, I think that's a wrap.

Hope you enjoyed my little ted talk.

#briar answers #ships #multishipping #batmm #blaze and the monster machines #crusher #meep #darington #ezra #zeg #darington dior #crusher vanto #ezra vanto #zeg cids

2 notes · View notes

weevil-wallflower · 5 years ago

Text

I just created an entire demon family...pt1

(aka my demon OCs. All are full demons so only gonna mention it once 👀)

My Demon Lore:

My understanding regarding demons is that not all demons are evil and thus not all tempt human beings to sin. Many simply live their lives peacefully, sometimes even among humans. Many even follow different religions much similar to humans. And of course due to that, the many good ones don’t align themselves with Satan which means they can neither be banished to hell nor does Satan has any jurisdiction over them. These demons are also not repelled by religious artefacts or places of religious worship or just religion in general, especially if they happened to be religious themselves. But no need to worry; these kinds of demons are peaceful for the most part and do not mean anyone any harm unless provoked or threatened. (This understanding comes from the knowledge I have about my religion uwu)

≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦

Winfryd Wright

General:

Full name: Winfryd Wright

Nickname(s): Winnie (by Zinnia), Win

Age: 37

Birthdate: 30th January, Aquarius

Gender: Male

Pronouns: He/Him

Sexuality: Heterosexual

Ethnicity: Caucasian

Nationality: British-American

Religion: Islam

Relationship status: Single (for now (・ω<) hint: it’s Zinnia, my very first oc)

Occupation: MD / Military Psychiatrist; Medic (previously)

Title/Rank: Doctor / Major

Physical appearance:

Complexion: White

Eyes: Light blue

Hair: Blonde

Height: 6′ 3″

Build/body type: Muscular and well-built

Weight: ~210 lbs / 95 kg

Unique trait(s): Polydactyly; 6 fingers on each hand with the 6th one, the pinky finger, being fully functional

Voice Claim: Jason Isaacs

Family:

Oliver Wright (son)

Zinnia Frost (girlfriend for now >:3)

Peter Wright (paternal uncle)

Wilhelmina “Mina” Wright (paternal aunt)

Anthony Winters (cousin)

Emma Winters (cousin-in-law)

Jody Winters (nephew)

His aunt and uncle don’t have children of their own. They raised Winfryd when his parents passed away when he was a child.

Psychology:

Moral alignment: Chaotic Good

Personality: Ambivert, benevolent, kind, sympathetic, open-minded, patient, polite.

Likes: His family, helping people, keeping a strict doctor-patient confidentiality, terrifying his enemies to death.

Dislikes: Those who harm others especially his family & friends, disorderliness, injustice, inequality.

Demonic Characteristics:

Physical appearance: (Since no one knows what demons really look like, my headcanon is that demons have two natural forms; their human form and their demon form. And they can willingly switch between those two forms)

Winfryd’s demonic form consists of:

Tough, pale skin.

Black sclera.

A third eye 👁️ - The ones on his hands aren’t always there. They are a product of his shape-shifting abilities.

Extremely sharp teeth; Unfortunately, his teeth remain same even in his human form.

Forked tongue.

Four long tentacle-like appendages protruding from his upper back. (Inspired by one of my favourite characters in MGS4, Laughing Octopus. I just love her design and how she moves :3).

Two black horns (Can’t have a demon without horns uwu).

Claws.

Powers & Abilities:

A very capable psychiatrist.

Proficient at close-quarters combat.

Knowledge in firearms.

Superhuman strength (not superhuman to the extent of superman. imagine Captain America).

Supernatural Durability.

Is religious himself so not repelled by artefacts or places of religion.

Sharper senses.

Accelerated healing.

Pyrokinesis.

Razor-sharp teeth.

Telescopic vision via third eye.

Human possession.

Can use his tentacles to bludgeon, impale, grab and smash or wrap and crush enemies easily. He can use them to climb and hold on to structures, even walls, ceilings etc and even use them for locomotion.

Claws sharp & strong enough to tear apart bodies without breaking or snapping off.

Umbrakinesis: He can generate and manipulate darkness and travel through shadows and phase through matter. Thus he’s untouchable as a shadowy. Can also draw the shadows to him if in dire need of healing,

Very acidic blood. Not exactly a power though... It’s said demons bleed fire since they are created from fire but that felt too over the top so I’ll stick with acidic blood.

Shape-shifting: It’s said that all demons can shape-shift to a limit, being able to take form of other humans & animals but Winfryd takes it to a whole other level. He can shape-shift into anything & when he wants to scare his enemies to death, he either appears in their room at night as a shadow figure or turns into eldritch things like these (an expert in body horror >:3):

All in all, Winfryd is a pretty powerful demon, not invincible but more powerful than most. And many things people use, for example the bible, the cross etc don’t work on him because he’s not a “Satanic demon” so to speak. He’s not repelled by religious things. He can even go inside the church and other places of worship.

Weaknesses/Limitations: Now, he may be powerful but that doesn’t mean he has no weaknesses:

Can be forced to reveal his demonic form by those who have knowledge on the occult.

Weak against ultrasonic weapons: Since demons have sharper senses than humans, these weapons would affect them more readily and would do a pretty good job of incapacitating them.

Extremely limited shadow manipulation in both total darkness and total light.

Intangible in his shadow form so can’t deal out any physical damage to his oponent.

No wings so can’t fly.

His pyrokinetic abilities weak against water.

Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD): a personality disorder that’s characterized by extreme perfectionism, order, and neatness. People with OCPD will also feel a severe need to impose their own standards on their outside environment.

≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦

Oliver Wright

General:

Full name: Oliver Wright

Nickname(s): Ollie (by Zinnia)

Age: 3

Birthdate: 30th March, Aries

Gender: Male

Pronouns: He/Him

Ethnicity: Caucasian

Nationality: British-American

Occupation: He’s a baby! >:O

Physical appearance:

Complexion: White; with freckles (cause freckles are cute uwu)

Eyes: Light blue

Hair: Blonde

Height: 2′ 11″

Build/body type: Small toddler

Weight: ~30 lbs / 14 kg

Family:

Winfryd Wright (father)

Zinnia Frost (stepmother; later on uwu)

Peter Wright (great uncle)

Wilhelmina “Mina” Wright (great aunt)

Anthony Winters (uncle)

Emma Winters (aunt-in-law)

Jody Winters (second cousin)

Unknown mother: His mother (also a demon) abandoned him so to speak. When he was born, she wanted to give him away but Winfryd said that he’ll look after the child. That didn’t sit well with her because she never wanted kids and so she made him choose between her and the baby. (Later on, this would be one of the reasons Winfryd will come to love Zinnia so much. That she treats his child, that’s not even her biological child, like her own.)

Psychology:

Moral alignment: Just a smol bebey.

Personality: A very sweet & well behaved little kid, albeit a bit possessive of his stepmom.

Likes: His stepmom i.e. Zinnia, his dad, his great aunt & great uncle, his cousin Jody, playing with building blocks, candies, cartoons, hugs. Definitely also gonna develop a liking for video games cause of his stepmom :3

Dislikes: Mean people, being yelled at - it scares him qwq, other people hugging or kissing his stepmom even if one of those people happens to be his dad.

Demonic Characteristics:

Physical appearance:

A third eye 👁️, just like his dad.

Yellow eyes.

Tiny lil razor-sharp baby teeth.

Cute lil bat-like wings.

Pointed ears.

Forked tongue.

Two horns (seems to be the right height to ram a person in a certain delicate spot 👀).

Powers & Abilities: Practically a baby so there aren’t much & those that he has aren’t fully developed yet & thus has no control over them:

Pyrokinesis: Ability to create, shape and manipulate fire. However, since Oliver is so young, he’s unable to control it. For now, it’s affected by his emotions for e.g. if he happens to be feeling frustrated, something nearby will spontaneously light on fire.

Adhesion Manipulation: basically can stick to surfaces, walk on walls, ceilings etc. But doesn’t have full control over it either.

Sharper senses.

Accelerated healing.

Very sharp teeth: Will resort to biting anyone who provokes/threatens him.

Acidic blood.

Telescopic vision via third eye.

Not repelled by artefacts or places of religion.

Weaknesses/Limitations:

Physically, he’s as strong as a normal human child so no superhuman strength.

Weak against ultrasonic weapons.

Can be trapped by those who have occult knowledge/practice. (But seriously, who would want to trap this cute lil kid? :’3).

Powers not yet fully developed.

Wings aren’t big enough to enable him to fly. Can only glide for now.

No claws yet.

His pyrokinetic abilities weak against water.

Is a baby so can’t possess.

Can’t pronounce Rs and Ls very well

Is a lil, innocent baby and must be protected at all costs.

≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦

Peter and Mina Wright

General:

Full names: Peter Wright (left) & Wilhelmina “Mina” Wright (right)

Ages: Peter: 65 & Mina: 60

Birthdates: Peter: 21st March & Mina: 23rd March, Aries

Sexuality: Heterosexual

Genders: Peter: Male & Mina: Female

Pronouns: Peter: He/Him & Mina: She/Her

Ethnicity: Caucasian

Nationality: British-American

Relationship status: Married to eachother ;3

Occupation: Dentists/Farmers (They met at dental school :3)

Physical appearance:

Complexion: Peter: White & Mina: Light Olive

Eyes: Peter: Light blue & Mina: Green

Hair: Peter: Grey & Mina: Blonde

Height: Peter: 6′ 0″ & Mina: 5′ 6″

Build/body type: Thin but lean, I guess? They’re getting old but they’re demons so still fit

Weight: Peter: ~159 lbs/72 kg & Mina: 117 lbs/53 kg

Voice Claims: (TBD)

Family:

Winfryd Wright (nephew): took him in after his parents’ death when he was a child. Treat him more like a son than a nephew.

Zinnia Frost (niece-in-law later on. Think of her as more like a daughter tbh)

Oliver Wright (grandnephew)

Anthony Winters (nephew)

Emma Winters (niece-in-law)

Jody Winters (grandnephew)

Psychology:

Moral alignments: Neutral Good.

Personality: kind, sympathetic, open-minded, patient, polite.

Likes: Their family, showing kindness, helping people, their jobs.

Dislikes: Cruelty, rudeness, inequality.

Demonic Characteristics:

Physical appearance:

Peter: Black wings, two horns, sharp teeth.

Mina: Red wings, red horns, sharp teeth.

Powers & Abilities:

Superhuman strength.

Supernatural Durability.

Sharper senses.

Accelerated healing.

Sharp claws & teeth.

Flight.

Acidic blood.

Human possession.

Weaknesses/Limitations:

Weak against ultrasonic weapons.

Can be trapped by those who have occult knowledge/practice.

Lack telescopic vision.

≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦ ω ≧ω≦

#oc's #original characters #my characters #demons #one smol babey #bio #character bio #tw demons #tw body horror #tw religion #picrew #used #long post

12 notes · View notes

transthaumaturge · 5 years ago

Text

Queer Zelda Theory

The Legend of Zelda universe has some interesting lore about the Gerudo Tribe and today I’d like to argue that one of the prevailing theories about them, namely the one about how they have children, isn’t as likely as the one that I’m about to propose.

The Gerudo Tribe was introduced in Ocarina of Time as a desert tribe comprised entirely of women. They have persisted in later games along more or less the same premise. We know that they have children, because 1) they need to keep making new Gerudo, 2) we see adorable Gerudo children (all girls) in Breath of the Wild, and 3) there’s that weird BS patriarchal prophecy from Ocarina of Time that the first boy born to the Gerudo in a century will grow up to be their king--that boy ended up being Ganondorf.

The prevailing theory seems to be that the Gerudo have babies with men of other races, namely Hylians, and that they integrate any girl babies that they have into their tribe while leaving boy babies with the father. The primary evidence put forward for this is the fact that a Sheikah Stone in OOT says they go to Hyrule Castle Town to look for boyfriends, and the fact that if you go to Gerudo Town in BOTW, many of them have plans to depart from the city and meet a voe (”man” in Gerudo) to fall in love with.

But I’ve always had a big problem with this theory: if the only way that Gerudo women can have babies is through interbreeding with males of other races, how are they not getting shorter and lighter-skinned over time? How do they look different from the other races that they’re having babies with after thousands of years of interbreeding? One possible explanation is that for all of the physical characteristics that we know the Gerudo for (dark skin tone, tall, etc.), the Gerudo genes are dominant to any of the other races they have children with. But that seems like a long shot. How would all of the genes coding for their characteristic body type, hair type, face shape and skin tone be dominant when genetics itself is so random? I think there’s a more likely theory.

The Gerudo women are genetically isolated from other races in Zelda because they’re having babies with each other.

Hear me out. First off, the Gerudo are not the only race in Zelda that’s all one presumed sex. We have no problem accepting that all Gorons are born male, or that they at least look male to the races like Hylians who have a sex binary. Maybe that’s because there aren’t any other races that Gorons could plausibly interbreed with, but still. They’re a race that only produces “males”. So what if the Gerudo are the same way? There are no Gerudo men because all the Gerudo are born looking female to races with a sex binary. That’s just what their species looks like. We further infer, because there’s an false but automatic assumption that sex and gender are synchronized for everyone, that all Gorons are men and all Gerudo are women.

Some Gerudo want to fall in love with men from other races, but that’s not unheard of for non-Gerudo either. Before the Great Calamity, Link and Mipha were basically a couple. And they’re not even the only instance of Hylian-Zora romance in that game! All we know is that Gerudo women sometimes get romantically involved with men from other races, full stop. We don’t know anything about their genitals, so why would we assume? Some Gerudo women have penises or don’t bear children, get over it. Maybe they can reproduce with each other and other races, or maybe their genitals and reproduction don’t look anything like what you would see on a Hylian. It doesn’t matter, because that’s not what determines how they look. It’s just us attempting to apply a cisheteronormative framework to a species that doesn’t fit those constraints.

Gerudo women call themselves women because that’s the closest approximation in common tongue to what they look like, at least in terms of what races with a gender binary can understand. Gorons do this too when calling themselves “men” and referring to their close friends as “brothers”, and they’re a notable exception to the “no men” rule in BOTW Gerudo Town. The Gerudo recognize that, like them, the Gorons are a race where everyone has a similar body type and no gender binary.

Some Gerudo have relationships with men from other races, but it seems impossible that some Gerudo wouldn’t also have relationships with one another or with women from other races. We don’t hear about these “same-sex” relationships either because we’re shown the game’s narrative through a biased lens, or because the Gerudo know that folks from other races can get homophobic and they don’t want to deal with any of that shit. You can’t tell me that Gorons, a race made entirely of rock, really have any need for clothes. They wear the bare minimum needed to not offend the other races. Us only seeing Gorons with clothes across all of the games they’re in doesn’t necessarily mean that they have anything under those clothes, so why should we assume that Gerudo only have “heterosexual” relationships because Link only sees them romancing men across the different games?

This opens the door to a lot of exciting genderqueer analysis of Gerudo culture. Are they agender? Do they have gender variation, but it’s based on things like personality types or aesthetic preferences? After all, if they all look similar to one another they would have an understanding of gender that’s different from ours and unbound from what their bodies look like. Finally, what does it mean for Gerudo to have a “male child”, like they did with Ganondorf? Was he a particularly rare genetic phenotype? Are there trans Gerudo, who identify with the concept binary races have of ‘men’ and identify as men themselves? Do the concepts of ‘Vai’ and ‘Voe’ just exist to appease the other races and define the Gerudo relative to those races, or do they mean something different in the Gerudo native tongue than what we think they mean?

There’s a lot to unpack here, but this solves the issue of why the Gerudo are still genetically isolated after so many thousands of years in a way that the prevailing theory doesn’t. The only reason more people aren’t thinking about it this way is because it doesn’t fit into a gender binary framework, and Gerudo look enough like Hylians that we want to use the gender binary to define them. Plus, Nintendo isn’t going to risk the controversy of implying that the Gerudo have babies with one another or don’t experience gender the way we do.

Some clarifications so you know where I stand on things, because sex and gender analysis is often a touchy subject:

1) Sex isn’t a binary for any species, neither is gender. Anytime that I referenced a ‘sex binary’ or ‘gender binary’, I was saying that some races act in a way throughout the series that suggests they believe there’s a binary for sex, gender, or both. In reality, I’m sure there are plenty of nonbinary Hylians, intersex Sheikah, trans Zora, and a whole slew of other gender identities and biological realities that don’t fit within a binary construct.

2) The goal of this theory wasn’t to “make The Legend of Zelda about genitals”. If that’s what you got out of this, then you’re missing the point. I’m just taking one theory about how the Gerudo have babies and suggesting a likelier alternative. If you’re unhappy with that, you’re probably also unhappy with the fact that BOTW show us what Gerudo children look like or that we see a pregnant Hylian woman in Twilight Princess.

Do you agree? Disagree? I’d love to hear your thoughts, especially if you have anything to add about how this might fit within queer theory. Thanks!

#genderqueer theory #queer theory #genderqueer #gerudo #the legend of zelda #queer zelda theory #zelda theory #queer video games #genderqueer video games #trans analysis #written by a trans woman #thaumaturgethoughts #long post

43 notes · View notes

theramseyloft · 5 years ago

Note

You probably already get this question alot, but could I have some care tips (Cage requirements, food, basic care) and anything that might repel me from them? (Especially for a racing Homer - which is what I'm assuming they have here since pigeon racing is quite a big industry in my country) (I'd love to adopt but sadly that's not an option here since there's barely even dog rescues here) Thanks so much in advance!

I’ll start with what might repel you, starting with things inherent to the species, and then to potential effects of their personal history.

First thing’s first; DUST!!!

If you, or any one in your house hold, has dust related allergies or any respiratory issues at all, pigeons are not the pet for you.

They are dust monsters! For their size, the Columbidae produce more dust that any other domestic bird.

It is also a much finer dust. It floats in the air like thin smoke and takes a long time to settle, so you will breathe more of it with a group of pet pigeons than you would with parrots, chickens, quail, or song birds.

Definitely more than any mammalian dander that I know of.

Pigeons are only really territorial over what they consider a nest space. Away from their nests, they are social and quite friendly, but the fiercely defend their nest from all comers.

If they are in a loft, or have free flight of a room, that aggression is constrained to the actual nest itself and anything with in about half a body length from the lip of it.

But if they are in a cage, the entire cage is space that they feel a powerful instinctive drive to defend.

Any uninvited entry is seen as an intrusion either by a predator or a rival, so I usually advise people not to attempt to physically interact at all with the pigeon in their cage.

Talking to the birds is fine, but all physical intrusion is seen as aggression that they have to defend against.

So, when you want to begin physically interacting with them, it’s best to invite them out into your room in the evening.

I’ll go into coop and home interaction training after the basic housing part.

Unless they are out of a sex linked pair, or you get them as fully mature adults, pigeons are absolute hell to sex.

Homers do become dimorphic as they age.

Karen is an adult racing homer cock.

Bird-bird is an adult hen of the same breed.

Look at Karen’s wattle (The thick skin above his nasal slits, at the base of his beak)

Now look at Bird-Bird’s.

His wattle is much bigger and more intricately developed than hers.

Her face is much finer featured than his.

He stands more upright.

She stands more horizontal.

But as peeps, they are nearly impossible to differentiate.

This is important, because the social behavior of cocks and hens and how it translates to humans tends to be VERY different.

Hens are VERY cuddly! Even into adulthood.

But adult cocks are platonically touch repulsed.

A flock mate is likely to make physical contact with a cock for one of two reasons: Another cock starting a fight, or a hen asking for sex.

They even make friends with flock mates through combat.

Until it sinks in otherwise, all attempts at physical contact with a cock is perceived as a challenge to a fight.

Non-aggressive contact with a cock is seen as an invitation for him to be your mate, and cock love is VERY pinchy!

Pigeon courtship consists of a three part ritual called Driving.

In the Chase trial, A cock will harass and bite a hen until she flees. If she was interested first, she’ll flirt to get his attention, and then fly off.

He HAS to chase her, keep up with her, and out maneuver her, all while herding her towards his nest so that she dives in when she’s too exhausted to continue to fly.

If he cannot out maneuver her, fly faster, and stay in the air longer than her, then her peeps will be more likely than her to be caught and eaten by a predator, and she will refuse that cock the opportunity to fill her eggs.

After she inspects the nest and has rested, she will try to leave. The second courtship trial revolves around blocking her exit and physically wrestling her back in until she is too exhausted to keep fighting him.

If he cannot block the generally smaller, weaker hen from leaving and fight her to a stand still, then he can’t hope to block another cock trying to force his way in, throw him out if he manages to pop in by surprise, or keep fighting him until he gives up.

Only after proving his stamina and strength to the Hen directly may he offer her a sample of the contents of his crop.

This is the sweet kissing part of courtship, after which they preen and cuddle and he’s allowed to step up onto her back and tread her.

This translates very poorly with a human partner, and if you have a cock as a companion, you have to be ok with a LOT of love bites before you can get to the soft cuddly part of the relationship.

Suddenly running up to you and biting out of nowhere is NOT aggression. They give LOTS of warning when they are upset.

Running up to attack you out of nowhere is a misguided attempt to begin Driving you, and he will go WAY over the top with it, because he is trying to impress a COLOSSUS with his physical strength, stamina, and tenacity.

You can understand how this could translate poorly to a human partner!

There are ways to respond to minimize the bitey bit, but we’ll get to those in another ask. This one is going to be VERY long as is.

Now, what we have just discussed is base line pigeon, with no outside components making anything more difficult.

Racers old enough to fly have been through daily training tosses; where they are grabbed, put in a basket, and released every day at increasing distances from the loft.

The best case scenario is a strong fear of hands from being grabbed and stuffed into the basket and occasionally restrained and injected with a vaccine.

The luckiest individuals have only had to navigate for miles every day to return to safety, food, and family.

Racing birds can also have to dodge hawks, or fly through inclement weather during training flights.

Some can even make it home severely injured.

Understandably, adult racers of either sex will need to be patiently worked through a STRONGLY reinforced fear of hands.

We have lots of posts discussing how to work with fearful pigeons, and I’ll be happy to go into it again in more detail, but that’s another for a different post.

Basics of care for pigeons are very simple.

They are strict granivores. Seeds are all they can digest, but they can eat a very wide variety of seeds. The more variation, the better.

Pigeons do not hull their seeds. They swallow them whole, and depend on the hulls as vital dietary fiber, so don’t give them seed that is already hulled.

Their diet should involve as much variety of seed, grains, and legumes as you can get your hands on, the size of an unpopped kernel of popcorn or smaller (Most breeds can;t swallow seeds much bigger than that) with some source of calcium available.

You can have a separate dish of oyster shell, or you can sprinkle powder in a single birds daily meal, or add liquid calcium to their water dish.

NOT all of those at once! Calcium can be overdosed!

Which ever method works most easily for you and your bird.

Pigeons are intensely social birds that get most of their enrichment from interaction.

They are happiest as free roaming house pets, like a cat or dog, that can come see you or go do their own thing as they choose.

Pigeons are smart enough to learn house rules.

Understandably, that is not an option for every one, and free roaming unsupervised before they learn the house rules can be dangerous.

If you cannot let the bird free roam their own room, you can easily modify a dog crate to house them comfortably.

They need square perches. Because they are cliff nesters, round perches put painful pressure on the ball of their feet, making walking painful.

I like to cut garden stakes to length and wire them into place.

A corner bunny litter pan is a decent nest box, but not necessary. They will nest just as happily in a cheap dog food dish.

Pigeons are ground foragers, so they prefer a shallow dish of food on the floor of their enclosure.

Ideally, the modified crate cage for the pigeon should be used like it would be for a pet dog; That is not where the animal lives full time. That is where it sleeps at night or hangs out when you aren’t home to supervise it, until it learns the house rules.

Toys are very simple, because their interaction tools are very limited.

Pigeons can recognize themselves in mirrors and love to play with them.

They enjoy bathing in a dish of water about hip-deep.

They can have sand or straw filled forage boxes to hunt for treats like safflower seeds in.

Stick-shaped, Shiny, and Jingly is their holy trinity of toy characteristics.

q-tips with the cotton tips cut off, tooth picks with the points clipped, wicker kitty balls with jingle bells inside, bread ties with jingle bells that are too big to accidentally swallow twisted to either side, or made into a jingly ring, are all cheap, simple toys that a single pet bird will have fun playing with.

I mentioned coop training earlier, and it’s super simple.

Starting in the evening, open the door to the cage and invite the bird out.

Don’t hang around waiting for it to come. Go settle in to do something quiet and sedentary, like reading a book or surfing the net.

Pigeons are naturally curious, and the best way to work then through the fear of people they may have developed is to be as nonthreatening as possible and reward their curiosity.

Talk to them to desensitize them to your voice and start teaching them how you communicate.

They will eventually grow brave enough to come explore you yourself.

A quiet, pleased greeting will reward them by not startling them.

Have safflower seeds available, but don’t try to reach out to give it to the birds.

Let them discover that you have them, and be still and non-reactive when they take some. Offer verbal praise, but don’t start trying to move until they ease away from automatic flightiness.

I specify beginning this process in the evening because trying to get a bird back into the crate before it trusts you is very difficult and your best bet to avoid making it afraid of you despite your friend-making efforts is to avoid having to chase it back into its pen at the end of flight time.

Starting these in the evening allows you the option to avoid chasing entirely just by turning off the lights.

At the end of out time, give a verbal warning like “Lights out” or “Bed Time”, and then wait a minute or two before actually turning off the light.

Pick the bird up in the dark, and return it gently to its enclosure.

It will begin to associate the “Lights out” or “Bed time” warning with the lights going out, and eventually learn to fly back to the pen in the space of time before the lights actually go out.

That’s about the skin and bone basics of care.

Please, by all means, send more asks for more information on any aspect or detail of pet pigeon keeping.

I am always happy to answer. ^v^

176 notes · View notes

eeemarvel · 4 years ago

Note

Uncommon characteristics ask, Pyre, numbers 15, 30, 40 and Letter B please!😊

Let’s see if I can manage to not erase this response this time lol. Sorry for the wait and thank you for the ask!!

15. How do they speak? Is what they say usually thought of on the spot, or do they rehearse it in their mind first?

I’m gonna take the best stab at this I can because I’m not exactly the best at describing physical things (although when I think of Pyre speaking, I know exactly what he sounds like).

I’ll say that he’s boisterous, loud, and explicit. He sometimes takes special care to enunciate words with an added degree of sharpness. I can definitely say that Pyre doesn’t rehearse the things he says, even if he does often sound like an actor delivering lines on the stage of Broadway. But his words are not premeditated; he’s got plenty of venom to spare at the tip of his tongue and everything he says, he says with the intention to sting.

His desire to hurt people with his words coupled with his teasing and somewhat flirtatious personality is what makes the things he says so powerful (???). He’s definitely a pro at getting a rise out of people. He isn’t manipulative and doesn’t play mind games, but what he does is good enough. He makes people angry enough to give him a real fight which is what he wants. He just likes stoking fires.

30. Who do they most regret meeting?

It’s definitely not Victor, that’s for sure. Victor is a constant in his life that he has come to expect and has resolved himself to look for whenever it does not come immediately to him because.. well there’s a lot going on there with that, isn’t it? His relationship with Victor isn’t exactly the question so I’ll just leave it at this: Pyre is competitive and egotistical. Victor is the only one alive who he believes to be on his level and he wants to change that. Permanently.

Pyre doesn’t really hold anyone in high enough regard or esteem to have as strong a feeling as regret towards their presence in his life. That being said, there aren’t many in his life. If I had to pick someone, it would perhaps be the Ares Island warden. The person in charge of the prison housing the world’s most dangerous super villains is no Mr. Rogers. At least when Pyre talks back to Victor, he has his powers to fall back on... on AI, he’s just some guy.

40. How sensitive are they to their own flaws?

Ah, now this is the passage that caused me the greatest deal of pain when i GOOFED and deleted it.

Pyre is acutely aware of his ability level as well as areas that have room for improvement or evolution, so much so that he doesn’t need to be using fire in order to practice how to use it. For example, when he terrorized Victor with that huge burning bird, he said he got the inspiration when he heard the news about Victor’s fire flock. He heard that news while on AI but still managed to imagine a way to make that happen without ever having done it before.

But this doesn’t necessarily reflect his own abilities of introspection.

Pyre is stuck in a routine of seeking validation through trying again and again to best heroes at his game. And in a way, it works. Just because the good guys always manage to arrest him in the end doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve “won”. Some heroes come out of fights with him looking ... a bit crispy? And if not badly injured, they are most likely some combination of incensed, riled up, distracted, or dishonored in a way that is not befitting of a hero.

Heroes are noble and good. They take the high road and do not behave the way a villain does: out of anger, vengeance, or spite. If a hero behaves that way, their image cracks a bit, and those cracks are harder to fix than a crack in a bone. If Pyre can create some of those cracks, that’s somewhat of a win, is it not? A hero with a wounded ego is easier to overpower the next time they throw hands.

Oh wow, maybe he is manipulative?

But, I digress.

Pyre is stuck in a routine of seeking validation because that is what he can afford to think about when it comes to imagining his future. To summarize the words of a very long and dead passage that I unintentionally murdered with my own hands: he’s not going to have a revelation on his own. Right now, the game he’s playing works for him. It gives him a goal, every day, for as long as he can keep it up, and those goals satisfy him. He has no reason to stop playing the game. And to be clear, the game is to get as many strong people as possible to prove to him what he’s already thinking: that he’s the best in the world.

I’m not sure how much I want to elaborate on this right now because I’m still debating how much of his story I want to flesh out and with which characters... but for now, just know that he sees no reason in changing the way he does things, no reason to be introspective and take a step towards some change.

B) What inspired you to create them?

When I originally imagined this fic, it was just supposed to be fluff about the YOI gang as heroes. But even back then, Pyre was still pretty much the same character that he is now. I made him specifically for Victor because Victor needed an “archenemy”.

Victor has control over an entire spectrum of power. On one side of that spectrum, we have powers that are more often associated with “good”: water and ice. Those elements can be healing, defensive, or protective. The elements of heat and fire are more often associated with “evil” because it’s hard to do much protecting with something that hurts to the touch. To add insult to injury, he doesn’t really have a choice in the matter because he can’t use water during the day. If he wants to be a hero, he has to find a way to make his power work for him. Victor worked diligently to figure out exactly how to make fire gentle. How to turn a weapon into a shield.

For most people with fire abilities, this isn’t really a problem. For starters, they’re not heroes lol. They just don’t have the sheer amount of power that Victor does. He can make a bonfire with a snap of his fingers without breaking a sweat. Comparatively, someone like Noor can light their fists on fire for a few hours before they start feeling woozy. So normal people don’t feel the kind of pressure Victor is under because they’re playing with matches while he’s got... idk... a bazooka?

Pyre is on his level, but Pyre woke up and chose violence. And in this world, people kind of expect him to in an ironic (but definitely not ironic when they’re right) way... the social culture around powers is kind of like our culture surrounding astrology. People with fire powers are kinda treated the way we treat people who are scorpios or geminis. We just kind of expect someone with fire powers to have a “bad” personality. Idk why I’m rambling but I’m basically saying that Victor could be Pyre but far worse.

Pyre is egotistical. Victor himself admitted he was a bit vain. They’re both competitive, Pyre to a horrible fault, Victor to some degree of regret and embarrassment (heroes shouldn’t behave the way he does around Pyre). Pyre and Victor are both teasing and flirtatious. They’re both dramatic. They both crave attention, in different ways, but again, they’re occupying opposite sides of the same spectrum. And they’re both insanely good at using fire; they’re innovative, sharp, and quick.

Pyre is deeply flawed, horrible, and definitely sorta kinda yes definitely a murderer. Victor, while he has his minor flaws, is no where near the kind of evil Pyre is, so I’m not saying that Victor would just start terrorizing the town after having a bad day. I’m saying that if he wasn’t also compassionate and loving, he could’ve gone down a darker road. Pyre’s goal is to prove that he’s the best. Victor’s goal is to protect those who don’t have the power to do it themselves. That alone puts miles and miles and miles between them on that spectrum they occupy.

Victor needed someone to give him trouble. I also needed a way to show the difference between a hero using fire and a villain doing it.

So Pyre was originally made for the plot, I guess.

TLDR: Pyre is naturally a drama queen, he doesn’t regret meeting anyone except maybe the AI warden, and I made him so everyone can appreciate the fact that Victor is good and not a dirtbag.

3 notes · View notes

aeipcthys · 4 years ago

Text

╰ ❛ 💉 — › samantha logan. cis-female. she/her. ╯ have you met victoria ‘vic’ dawson yet ? this twenty six year old aries has been living in the seattle area for three years. she makes a living as media relations coordinator, which is best suited for their adventurous, independent, reckless, and resentful personality. someone to you by banners is one of their favorite songs.

trigger warnings: depression, drugs, illness, cancer, death

full character page here

BASIC INFORMATION

Full Name: victoria rae dawson

Nickname(s): vic

Age: 26

Date of Birth: april 1, 1994

Hometown: tacoma, washington

Current Location: seattle, washington

Ethnicity: irish, trinidadian

Nationality: american

Gender: cisgender female

Pronouns: she/her/hers

Orientation: this is me we’re talking about what do you think

Status: single, dating

Religion: used to believe in god, has since abandoned religion

Political Affiliation: liberal

Occupation: a media relations coordinator in the pr department at seattle grace mercy west

Living Arrangements: shares an apartment with rebecca goldmann and stephanie edwards

Language(s) Spoken: english, american sign language

Accent: american

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE

Face Claim: samantha logan

Hair Color: dark brown

Eye Color: dark brown

Height: 5'7

Weight: 127 lbs

Build: fit

Tattoos: yes, idk what they are yet but they’re there

Piercings: ears/cartilage, got a nose ring in college because she thought it would be rebellious but really it was just uncomfortable

Clothing Style: either looks really put together or is wearing leggings and a large tshirt there is no in between

Usual Expression: a furrowed brow

Distinguishing Characteristics:

HEALTH

Physical Ailments: none.

Neurological Conditions: depression

Allergies: penicillin

Sleeping Habits: wacky

Eating Habits: she’s a snacker of all things, she used to really hate vegetables, still kind of does

Exercise Habits: she likes those fun workout classes, zumba or dancing or something, also rock climbing for some reason

Emotional Stability: once again, this is me we’re talking about what do you think

Sociability: a mostly friendly person

Body Temperature: i never know what to say for this she’s like average

Addictions: none.

Drug Use: yes

Alcohol Use: oh yes

PERSONALITY

Label: tbd

Positive Traits: adventurous, independent, honest, driven, confident, supportive

Negative Traits: reckless, competitive, tactless, moody, messy, resentful

Fears: being stereotypical, missing out

Hobbies: rock climbing

Habits: smoking, tbd

FAVOURITES

Weather: warmth, sun, sunshine!!! why she leaves in seattle we can’t say

Colour: shades of green

Music: anything, loves some bops

Movies: action/adventure

Sport: for watching, wrestling or hockey

Beverage: the teas - sweet tea, long island iced tea

Food: cuban

Animal: she likes raccoons, they’re really cute just misunderstood

FAMILY

Father: marcus dawson

Mother: colleen dawson

Sibling(s): abigail hayes (neé dawson), cormac hayes (brother-in-law)

Children: none.

Pet(s): none.

Family’s Financial Status: middle class

EXTRA

Zodiac Sign: aries (happy aries szn)

MBTI: estj

Anything Else:

BIO

Victoria Dawson was born to Marcus and Colleen Dawson in Tacoma, Washington. She was the younger sister of Abigail Dawson (later known as Abigail Hayes). Abigail was about seven years older than Victoria, which set them up for an interesting relationship from the start.

The girls’ parents had a great experience raising Abigail. She was easy-going, self-sufficient, kind, energetic, beautiful, and intelligent. She was everything you could hope for from a first child. The Dawsons thought Abigail deserved a sibling to go through life with, so they began trying for a second child. It took a few years, but eventually, along came Victoria, and she was far from what they bargained for.

Growing up, Abigail was constantly looking over Victoria, being kinder and more accommodating than might be typical of a big sister. But Victoria needed it. From the beginning, Victoria had a clearly adventurous soul, and it made her parents and sister constantly fearful.

Victoria was the type of kid to be at the playground and jump off the top of the slide instead of going down it. She would reach out to touch the flame on a candle just to see what it felt like. And that was the kind of spirit that drove her life. She always wanted to see what it felt like. It drove Abigail insane, and she constantly joked about wrapping Victoria up in bubble wrap and a helmet for the rest of her life. That probably would have done her some good.

Although Victoria loved Abigail, she always wished Abigail didn’t always have to be so perfect. Everyone commented on it, including their parents. They would ask Vic ‘why don’t you try being more like your sister?’ Just once, she wanted Abigail to be the one to screw up or do something reckless, but that day never seemed to come. Even as they grew up and Abigail went off to school, she only seemed to climb higher and higher up on her pedestal. At least, through Vic’s eyes.

It wasn’t until college that Vic really found the freedom she had always longed for. She specifically looked for a school far away from home, opting to attend University of North Carolina just to put some space between her and her overbearing family. Her freshman year, Vic really took that opportunity to try new things, which meant she was in and out of the student conduct office within her first year. But she just saw it as she always did--having fun, living a little, and trying new things.

Her sophomore year, Vic decided to move off campus, putting up a random posting looking for a roommate. This is how she met Rebecca Goldmann. Although they were not exactly alike, Rebecca seemed to be the perfect fit to balance Victoria out a bit. They ended up becoming extremely close throughout college, despite the fact that they were clearly moving down completely different career paths.

Throughout college, Abigail always made an effort to reach out and keep in touch with her sister, despite the fact that Victoria was extremely inconsistent in returning her calls and outreach. Abigail had been developing this entirely different life, falling and love with Cormac Hayes and having a couple of children. Vic wanted to be apart of their life more, and Abigail always kept the door open, but she always struggled with feeling like her “crazy little sister.” It wasn’t until she found out Abigail got sick that the floor dropped out from under her.

Her sister’s illness hit Vic hard. Seeing the cancer slowly eat away at her made Victoria feel like it was eating away at her too. She was constantly angry, at Cormac, at the cancer, even at Abigail. It wasn’t fair, but she didn’t know how to process it. Even though there was resentment there, Victoria loved Abigail with all of her heart and soul. Abigail was her protector. Her guardian. Everything good about Victoria was because of Abigail’s influence. Losing her was the most devastated she had ever felt.

The time after Abigail’s death was hard. Vic moved home, but even being around her family was difficult. Her parents were never the same. There was this huge whole in their lives, and it was one Victoria knew she could never fill. She also had a hard time looking at Cormac after. Being a doctor, Victoria always secretly wished that he would have saved her. That he could have protected Abigail from it all. But really, Victoria hated herself the most. When her nephews moved to Seattle with Cormac, Vic vowed that she would be a part of their lives, however hard it might be.

CURRENTLY

Victoria has been in Seattle for years, but she only recently started working at the hospital, putting her media relations degree to good use.

She is finding it very hard to accept that Cormac has already moved on with a new relationship. Finding out about their new baby certainly won’t be easy.

If it wasn’t for being with her best friend, Vic would probably go crazy. Rebecca helps ground her and is always there when she needs to have some fun, cry, or blow off some steam.

Despite what some might assume, Victoria has always been a bit of a romantic. Falling in love, after all, is the greatest adventure to her, and she is always searching for the right person to take it with.

#traumaintro #she was born with stars in her eyes ( victoria dawson. )#( character intro. )

3 notes · View notes

tlbodine · 5 years ago

Text

A Brief History of the Slasher

Is there a more iconic face for the horror genre than the knife-wielding psychopath? Many would say no. Although the tried-and-true slasher formula is so played out as to be a cliche -- and fresh examples played straight are tough to come by in the modern age -- for many, slasher films are the heart and soul of horror movies.

How did that happen? What do they say about us on a cultural level? And where should you start when it comes to a formal study of the topic? Let’s delve deep and find out!

Murder and mayhem are evergreen topics of fascination for humans, and we’ve been telling stories about murderers since Cain killed Abel. But these stories didn’t become what we would formally call “slashers” until the 1970s.

So what is a slasher?

Slasher films are defined by a few shared characteristics:

A high body count (multiple victims)

Murders are shown on-screen and often from the POV of the killer

The murders happen one by one, incorporating pursuit, struggle, and finally death

The killer may have a supernatural influence, but it will have the physical appearance of a human (and may often simply be a human)

In almost every instance, the killer is portrayed as being insane or rendered deeply troubled by a past trauma which had triggered the murderous impulse. The killer is frequently dehumanized, and the victims are usually young.

Slashers often adhere to their own sort of moral logic, more closely resembling Medieval morality plays than perhaps any other modern genre of storytelling. By utilizing a cast of archetypes, various virtues and flaws can be represented among the victims.

These traits are what differentiate slashers from other murder-focused horror, thriller and mystery tales.

Consider, for example, the narrative structure of an Agatha Christie murder mystery like And Then There Were None. In this book, a group of strangers are brought under mysterious circumstances to a remote location, where they are systematically murdered as an act of vengeance. In concept, this seems like it should be a slasher -- but its execution is quite different. In the book, the murders are a backdrop; the characters (and reader) are confronted with bodies rather than scenes of overt violence.

The First Slasher

In 1974, two films came out that gave birth to the modern slasher.

The first, released in October, was Tobe Hooper’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The second, released in the USA in December of that year, was Bob Clark’s Black Christmas.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre tells the story of a group of friends who run afoul of a family of cannibals living in a rural farmhouse. Black Christmas is about the systemic murder of sorority girls during Christmas break. And both left an indelible mark on horror history.

It’s important to put some context on the world these films were created in:

The recent dissolution of the Hays production code meant that movies could be more graphically violent and morally depraved than ever before

The Vietnam war was raging, and for the first time in history, televised footage of the battle was piped into living rooms on the evening news

Multiple serial killers were active in the country, and their exploits also graced the daily newspapers and nightly news to sow terror

Richard Nixon’s presidency was marked by an as-then unprecedented level of corruption and scandal

Gender politics provided both sexual freedom and career ambitions to a generation of women, and the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade case legalizing abortions played a massive role in both gender relations and the way we would think about life and bodily autonomy.

The 1970s provided, in other words, a perfect storm of circumstances that collided to give birth to slashers, and neither Hooper nor Clark are shy about citing these as their inspiration. Texas Chainsaw was billed in theaters as a true story as an act of political defiance against newscasts that spread misinformation; Black Christmas is at its heart a film about abortion and a woman’s right to leave an abusive relationship. They were undeniably films of their time.

Texas Chainsaw inspired a wave of sensationalist "ripped from the headlines" murder movies loosely based on real killers, such as Wes Craven's The Hills Have Eyes (1977), which was based on the Sawney Bean legend or Charles B. Pierce's The Town That Dreaded Sundown (1976), which was based on the Texarkana Phantom Killer.

And Black Christmas, of course, served as the thematic springboard for a little film called Halloween.

Halloween and the Final Girl

In 1978, a little-known small-time director named John Carpenter was hired to make a movie with the working title, The Babysitter Murders. It would be about -- you guessed it -- babysitters who got murdered. The idea was later adapted to take place on Halloween, likely for commercial reasons: People like watching scary movies in October, so setting a film on Halloween night would surely help with popularity.

John Carpenter certainly did not wholly plagiarize Black Christmas with his holiday-themed slasher, but the earlier film's influence is visible all the same -- from a shared lineage of "the call is coming from inside the house" babysitter folk legend, to the perspective work on establishing shots of the house and the ambiguously bleak ending.

But compared to Black Christmas, Halloween is horror with its edges filed down so it'll be easier to swallow. Both films have predominately female casts, but the sorority girls in Black Christmas have sexual agency and outspoken opinions that are nowhere to be found in Carpenter's work. In fact, Halloween so aggressively fails the Bechdel Test that it seems to do so on purpose -- there is not a single scene with two girls where they are not talking about a boy. And while Black Christmas deals with complex topics like abortion, domestic violence, and the unreliability of the police, Halloween simplifies its formula down to the utterly basic: Michael Myers kills because he is pure evil, and that is simply what evil does.

Despite its flaws -- or perhaps because of them -- Halloween became an immediate and enormous hit. It also introduced several clever storytelling techniques that were crucial to the advancement and development of the slasher genre:

The introduction of a Final Girl, the lone survivor who holds out against the onslaught of terror. (Carpenter denies that Laurie Strode’s virginal innocence has anything to do with her survival, but “final girl as virgin” would persist as a trope for a very long time)

A masked killer. Although we’d seen masked murders in many films before (I’ve talked in the past about the trope of the mask-wearing murderer, and the way it is both thematically and logistically useful in storytelling: https://tlbodine.tumblr.com/post/189658195609/the-masked-knife-wielding-psycho), the “look” of Michael Myers is so iconic that it inspired a need for future killers to have a similarly thoughtful design, decking them out almost like comic book superheroes.

Franchising opportunities. Although earlier movies had spawned sequels, Halloween exploded as a franchise thanks in large part to the iconic design and the simplistic good-vs-evil storytelling formula. Future slashers would latch onto this killer-centric franchise formula for over a decade.

Halloween became the most profitable independent film, holding the record for 16 years, which goes to show just how successful the formula truly was.

The Golden Age of Slashers

As the 1970s gave way to the 1980s, the advent of VHS and Betamax formats created a market for low-budget straight-to-video films. Because slashers are so cheap to make (you don't need any famous actors, can film entirely in one location, and practical effects can be as simple as a few gallons of stage blood), they were ideal candidates for the job. On the big screen, horror was enjoying an unusually high level of popularity, a proven money-maker, simultaneously commercial and subversive in a decade of opulence and social conservativism.

So onto that stage walks Sean S. Cunningham's gory slasher, Friday the 13th, where a group of teenage camp counselors are brutally murdered, frequently wile having sex. The film spawned a widely successful franchise, which swiftly began borrowing elements of Halloween -- a silent and indestructible masked killer, a signature musical score -- to become a pop culture mainstay. The 1983 Robert Hiltzik film, Sleepaway Camp, cashes in on the "death to camp counselor" plot in the same way that Fred Walton's When a Stranger Calls touched on babysitter murders in 1979.

A whole slew of less-successful films would follow, most of them lost to the history books but still living in dollar-bin DVD collections. Some, like Prom Night and My Bloody Valentine, would earn a cult following. One noteworthy cult favorite is Slumber Party Massacre, directed and written by women (Amy Holden Jones and Rita Mae Brown, respectively), which turns some slasher tropes in their head.

A glut of films, most of them instantly forgettable, led to a decline in slasher popularity -- until Wes Craven's A Nightmare on Elm Street in 1984.

Cracking Wise and Slashing Teens

A Nightmare on Elm Street introduces Freddy Krueger, a different sort of horror villain than audiences had seen before. Krueger is a supernatural killer who stalks his victims in their dreams, bringing a fresh supernatural twist to the slasher genre. And, unlike Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees, Freddy is anything but silent. Thanks in part to the charisma of lead actor Robert Englund, the character's darkly comedic personality became utterly riveting.

Plenty of dream-related horrors would follow, none of which would make much of a splash. But one film franchise did latch on to a similar formula: Child's Play, directed by Tom Holland in 1988, introduced another supernatural wisecracking killer in the form of Chucky, a murderous doll possessed by the soul of as serial killer.

These major film franchises -- Halloween, Friday the 13th, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and Child’s Play -- would go on to spawn numerous sequels and become such a thoroughly pervasive part of pop culture that you can find their likeness everywhere. But despite the many imitators, there was little in the way of innovation in the genre until the mid 90s.

Do You Like Scary Movies?

Wes Craven toyed with the idea of self-referential horror in New Nightmare, a Freddy Krueger film that was itself a meta-analysis of Freddy Krueger films. But he would revisit the idea with far greater success in 1996 with Scream.

Created by horror lovers, for horror lovers, Scream is designed to be the most quintessential slasher film ever created. Relying on a hip, young cast to draw in a fresh audience, Scream works by combining nostalgia, meta-analysis, humor, and buckets of blood into a single film. The opening scene is a direct homage to When a Stranger Calls, and the masked killer is a deliberate call-back to earlier films.

Unsurprisingly, Scream was a huge hit that ushered in a brief but furious wave of slashers, like the star-studded I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997) and Urban Legend (1998), and Scream itself had several sequels and even a TV series. But the 1990s were something of a dark era for the slasher film, seeing the release of some spectacularly lackluster franchise installments. One exception to that was the fan-favorite Freddy vs Jason, which pits the two killers against one another -- a delightful premise, but one that had strayed far from the slasher roots.

Modern Slasher Films

The 1990s slasher reboot was short-lived and mostly forgettable, and by the 2000s filmmakers had mostly turned away from the genre entirely, except for a slew of nostalgia cash-in reboots of every popular franchise.

The one exception was meta-analysis -- building on Scream, these films began to deconstruct the genre in a way that would combine horror, humor, and criticism.

The Final Girls (2015), directed by Todd Strauss-Schulson, takes this sort of meta approach. The Cabin in the Woods (2012), directed by Drew Goddard but bearing the fingerprints of co-writer and producer Joss Whedon, takes it to even further excess, providing both a thorough deconstruction of horror gropes and an entirely new mythos to give it a fresh framework.

But the problem with deconstructions is that, once a few truly successful ones have been made, it becomes essentially impossible to create the original thing in earnest anymore. And so the slasher as a sub-genre has reached its bloody end.

Where Did All The Slashers Go?

With dozens of slashers spanning more than 40 years of film history, it’s pretty hard to create something new with the format. Which is not to say that people aren’t still making them -- they are -- but there is less room to innovate within the notoriously rigid and simplistic slasher formula.

Culturally, we’ve moved on a lot from the 1970s as well. For one, serial killers are no longer the threat they once were. Babysitters and camp counselors are rarely teenagers, either -- in fact, teens aren’t leaving the house as much in general. And a rise in information technology, communications and surveillance has made it harder to isolate victims and commit murders over a long period of time -- our mass murders tend to happen in shooting sprees instead these days. For another, that same information technology has made us extremely jaded and hard to impress with gore.

The 2000s delivered violence at levels utterly beyond anything in history. The rise of the so-called torture porn -- a genre that dispenses with the stalking and killing of multiple victims in favor of lingering on the painful mutilation of a small handful -- delivered gore unlike any seen in earlier slashers. Cable television series like The Walking Dead deliver graphic violence with unprecedented regularity -- you no longer need to pick up a “video nasty” to indulge in some gruesome gore.

And, well, unfortunately, the internet has made it easier than ever to see real violence, from terrorist beheading videos to medical gore to live-streamed murders.

Gore for gore’s sake is simply not as compelling in the 21st century, and that takes away much of the slasher’s appeal.

Slashers have had to morph and adapt to find a foothold for survival. In the 2000s, we saw their metamorphosis in real time: From torture porn to home invasion to a cornucopia of more innovative horrors dwelling on fears both large and small.

We’ve probably seen the last of masked knife-wielding, babysitter-killing psychos...but the horror genre is richer for it.

#horror movies #slahsers #slasher films #horror #horror analysis

33 notes · View notes

atlaskat · 6 years ago

Text

Bakugou Katsuki -- psychological analysis (meta)

I’m not a psychologist, just a social science student studying for an exam, so take this with a grain of salt.

I’m also not totally up to date with the manga (I’ve read up until volume 17). Please feel free to add your own thoughts in the replies if you want to, or call me out if I make a mistake.

------

I won’t be speaking too much on biological factors, but I think it might be good to just go through some thoughts I have on the matter. In psychological theory, there’s something called “temperament”, which is essentially a child’s most basic form of relating to the world. A well-known experiment on temperament is the famous Marshmallow experiment, where small children were presented with a marshmallow. If they could wait a certain amount of time without eating it, they would receive one more. Follow-up studies on these children showed that those which showed restraint and could wait for the marshmallow had generally gotten further in life -- these children often developed the capability of making and sticking to long-term plans, and were able to work much more methodically than their peers.

I think Katsuki would be one of the children that waited for another marshmallow. At first glance, he seems very impulsive, rushing into battle and relying on his brute force -- but I’m actually very sure that this characteristic is part of his later development, and not part of his temperament. The reason I believe this is because he shows a very clear understanding of a much bigger and long-term picture. He is very committed to becoming a hero, and this commitment entails behavior which isn’t completely typical for people his age (such as studying hard, never slacking off despite his delinquent-like persona -- even in middle school --, sleeping early, training very hard to maintain his physical condition even as a young teen, etc). This shows his self-restraint, and his ability to plan ahead.

(I’m aware that the amount of pressure to do well in education is very different in many Asian countries, but compare Katsuki to for example Kaminari -- who also wants to be a hero, but is at the bottom of his class and doesn’t seem very good at planning or studying hard. What I think is most important here is to highlight Katsuki’s commitment).

I would also argue that heritability play a role in Katsuki’s personality and cognition. Intelligence and capability to learn have some hereditary factors, which I think apply to Katsuki. It’s difficult to say what came first in this regard though -- a child might be born with a slight affinity for learning (being able to memorize things quickly could be such a trait), but this doesn’t mean they become “smarter” because of it. In this specific case, the humanistic approach of “without the right support and challenge, no child will reach their full potential” is applicable.

Still, I think Katsuki was born with at least some higher capability to grasp new concepts, which I think plays a part in his, at least partial, understanding of what it takes to not just get on top but actually stay there. Quickly memorizing new information could also play a part in the way others view him -- thinking he’s skilled, amazing, even as a small child -- which in turn fuel both his willingness to learn and his ego. I think his kindergarten years are hugely important, more on it later.

The last thing I would like to say Katsuki was born with is extroversion. This personality trait can be studied in the brain -- the “reward systems” of the brain (mainly dopamine production and the middle brain as well as around nucleus accumbens) react stronger to positive emotions. I say “born with” because of its clear hereditary implications (and as I think this trait comes from his mother Mitsuki. However, it’s possible to theorize that instead of being born with extroversion, Katsuki was born more or less without neuroticism, which occurs when the activity of the amygdala is higher than normal. This leads people to be more anxious, cautious, and avoid situations which might cause unpleasant emotions). Katsuki was very young (2-4 years old) when he first began enjoying being the center of attention, which I think shows he was born with extroversion.

Katsuki’s attachment style Since we haven’t seen that many interactions between Katsuki hand his family, especially not as a child, this part will contain a lot of my own theories and headcanons, sorry about that.

Attachment styles are easily perceived phenomenons studied in depth by Mary Ainsworth and John Bowlby. Ainsworth noted that a child’s style of attachment manifests itself in two primary forms:

Stranger anxiety and separation anxiety. After 6 months of age a child will show an autonomous need to be close to, or seek comfort in, their “object of attachment”, usually a parent (often the mother). This need becomes apparent when the child is introduced to a stranger, or left alone, through signs of stress/anxiety.

Ainsworth devised a test to study these anxieties -- the “Strange Situation”. The test looks like this:

The child arrives in a new room together with the mother

A stranger appears

The child is left alone with the stranger

The stranger leaves

The mother returns

All in all this only took three minutes. The most interesting part was the child’s reaction once the mother came back -- its attachment style was most clear then.

Children usually have one main attachment style, which have two categories with a few subcategories. Secure attachment The child clearly prefers the mother to the stranger. It might cry or be anxious while the mother is gone, but stops as soon as she returns. These children go on to use their object of attachment as a secure base while they explore the world, meaning they return to seek comfort if they experience something negative, but quickly recover.

Later in life, these people can regulate emotions with more ease. They also cope better with adversity, and are able to connect better with people their age (forming deeper relationships). I believe Izuku was a securely attached child. Insecure attachment This form is more complicated. It has three main categories:

1. Resistant attachment The child has attached itself to in this case the mother, but the attachment is less stable. The child is anxious to let the mother out of sight -- doesn’t trust she will come back. The child may continue crying even after the mother returns and cradles it. 2. Avoidant attachment The child, generally doesn’t cry and doesn’t show its physical/emotional needs. Often it will act a bit aloof -- avoiding or completely ignoring the mother. It will act similarly towards the mother as with the stranger. These children have learned that their natural behaviors to attract attention from their objects of attachment will lead to rejection, so they suppress the needs for affection/comfort. More often than not they still experience the same levels of anxiety as other children, but don’t seek their parents to soothe them.

Disorganized attachment The child shows a lot of contradictory behavior, such as crying to be picked up, but immediately wanting to be let down again, often as a result of being scared of their object of attachment. People who were insecurely attached as children generally have more emotional problems, and are at higher risk for mental illness. I believe Katsuki had an avoidant attachment style. The attachment style of a child is largely based on the behavior of the object(s) of attachment, the parents. Insecure attachment is usually the result of parents not understanding/being unable to provide the comfort their infants seek. My theory is that Mitsuki is, like her son, a very determined and career-driven person. Like I’ve said before, I think she’s extroverted, but I also believe that she doesn’t easily connect deeply on an emotional level with people. This could be a result of how she herself was treated as a child -- as we tend to mimic our own parents -- or simply just her personality. Her own emotional needs might not take up a big part of her life, or she doesn’t really need others to comfort her, which in turn means she might assume others are the same. Ainsworth had a few criteria for a “good parent”:

1. Responsive 2. Permissive 3. Cooperative 4. Psychologically available

I think Mitsuki was, or is, lacking in most/all of these. Clearly, from what we’ve seen, she’s stubborn and knuckle-headed -- while she might have been responsive to baby Katsuki, she might not have known how to handle things beside his clear physical needs, like keeping him fed and clean. If she was also working during this period, as I would definitely assume (considering her job as a fashion designer and how well-off the family is; they live in a huge house), her availability might have suffered. Think like this:

- Mitsuki is tired, but has to finish work - Katsuki begins crying - Mitsuki changes his diaper and feeds him, but puts him down again to work - Katsuki starts crying after only a little while, but nothing ‘looks’ wrong (he’s fed, clean, warm, etc) so Mitsuki goes back to work - Katsuki continues crying, which frustrates Mitsuki because ‘nothing is wrong’; she might snap -- such as yelling, ignoring Katsuki further, or leaving the room entirely. As Katsuki begins to speak (let’s say at around 1,5 years), he might try to achieve emotional closeness by showing her his toys, trying to talk to her/play with her. If he is already ‘extroverted’ by this point he will be a lot more vocal than a timid child his age. If he hurts himself, or becomes scared, he probably tries to get Mitsuki’s attention at first, and I think this is where her biggest mistake might’ve lied. Based on how she treats Katsuki being kidnapped by the League of Villains I believe she disregards a lot of comfort-seeking behaviors as weakness.

“When you get down to it, you got taken and inconvenienced everybody cuz you’re so weak!!” I think this shows clearly how Mitsuki herself feels. Of course she worried for her son’s safety, but worrying about someone in itself is an inconvenience to her. She equates her own worrying with other people’s weakness -- if only people weren’t so weak, she wouldn’t have to be inconvenienced by worry. Mitsuki, like any parent, never wanted anything bad to happen to Katsuki. She was probably very aware that the world could be a dangerous place, so she tried to eradicate any ‘weakness’ within her own child so as he couldn’t be hurt by the world. I’m not sure where to place Masaru, Katsuki’s father, in all of this. A child can have several objects of attachment, but Bowlby expressed that usually there is a sort of hierarchy in the attachments themselves. For example, the child might favor one parent for playing, but prefer the other if they become scared. I think Mitsuki simply was the more important object of attachment in this case (this can be a result of having more skin-to-skin contact in the first months, or Masaru could for example have been working a lot of the time). Izuku on the other hand became securely attached to his mother Inko, as I think Inko is very emotional and open as a person. While the scene where Izuku cries about not having a quirk comes when he is about 4 years old, I still think this shows clearly that he seeks comfort in his mother. So, a little TL;DR before the next point: Katsuki was an ‘extroverted’ baby, who experienced a lot of emotional rejection from his mother very early on, which made him suppress his needs -- perhaps unconsciously starting to share his mother’s view on emotionality itself (and his own need for help at times) as weakness. Erikson’s life stages and Piaget’s cognitive development Another model I’ll be using is Erikson’s life stages as well as a theory by Piaget. We’ve passed the first life stage -- infant (0 - 1,5 years). This is where Erikson means that the child will develop a basic way of relating to the world: positive (the world is a place where my needs are met) or negative (the world is a place where I feel alone). Right before starting kindergarten I think Katsuki had developed the negative view, even though he was an ‘extroverted’ baby, as a result of his attachment style. - Izuku, on the other hand, developed the positive one. This meant he had a fundamental sense of hope for the world, which is very important later in life. The second stage -- toddler (1,5 - 3 years). Starting kindergarten is an extremely important step in Katsuki’s development. I think he would’ve been completely different without it -- I really can’t stress this enough. Avoidant-attached children will have to fulfill their needs somehow -- usually through validation from sources beside the object of attachment. ‘Avoidants’ can become narcissistic and overly confident, all as a means to protect themselves. This is exactly what happened with Katsuki, let me explain: As I’ve already explained, I think he was born with both extroverted qualities and an affinity for learning new things. His innate temperament was also perseverance. His avoidant attachment meant that it was seemingly very easy for him to be separated from his mother to go to kindergarten, although at the start, his negative view of the world might’ve made him cold/closed off. The kindergarten personnel catered to him, though. Through a lot of positive reinforcement (to which he is especially sensitive as of his extroversion), attention, and frequent intelligence-related challenges (such as new and complicated games, learning to read, etc) Katsuki developed a more positive outlook. According to Erikson, if one stage of life doesn’t “succeed”, it can be recuperated later, which I believe is what happened here. Where I think the kindergarten fell short however is with too much praise, or very easily letting Katsuki off the hook. I believe they saw very much potential in Katsuki from a young age -- perhaps because of this they were too eager to inforce how amazing they thought he was. Often times, we think that anger should be “released” and not repressed. We should get it out of our system, so to speak. However -- counter-intuitively -- we shouldn’t actually do this. Borrowing from the cognitive approach to psychology, the more often we think a certain thought or behave in a certain way, the stronger that mental connection becomes. I think Katsuki, because of his avoidant attachment, might’ve acted really aggressively as a child too. Instead of giving him strategies to cope with his anger the kindergarten teachers probably encouraged him to “release” it, which just made this cognitive scheme easier to access. Thus more likely to be activated again. Children who feel that their opinions and ideas are interesting and valuable will become more sociable, and take more charge, while children with overprotective carers will start doubting their own abilities. Where Mitsuki wasn’t able to do right, the kindergarten picked up the slack and followed Katsuki’s whims to encourage him. He probably developed really quickly, which probably stunned the teachers and carers. The adults’ attention fueled his confidence and ego, and this drew other children to him, which meant more attention.

According to Bandura and Skinner, both real consequences, imagined ones, and reinforcement dictate personality as well as social interactions. Sometimes though, something called “observational learning” occurs, in which no reinforcement is needed. A child often learns behavior by imitating something someone else does, and I’m not excluding this as a possibility to explain Katsuki’s bias/bigotry against quirkless people. Of course, cognitive bias also plays a major part here. As humans, we are wired to look for details which inforce our worldview.

Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism. The individual and the environment affect each other mutually. This is part both of how Katsuki grows egotistical, and also his disdain for Izuku. Another important factor of personality is expectation. If an individual expects to be able to change the environment, they are more likely to attempt to do this. Without kindergarten intervention I believe Katsuki would have become a pessimistic, unmotivated person. Third stage (3 - 5 years) By this point Katsuki had already replaced his emotional needs and attachment to his mother with attention and admiration from his kindergarten peers/teachers (feeling superior to others). During this stage the child is supposed to develop a sort of pride of their own abilities. Katsuki was already an independent child (also because of being an ‘avoidant’), but this is where it might’ve went a little overboard. The development of his quirk was, as we all know, a turning point in both Katsuki’s view of himself/the world and his relationship to Izuku. This is mainly because of the quirk development. I’ve already stated that the kindergarten let too much slide -- the bullying of Izuku started even before the quirk development -- but now that becomes more important, as Katsuki was now capable of doing a lot more damage. Developing the quirk solidified Katsuki’s inflated ego -- now he was sure that he was the most awesome kid alive. It also solidified Izuku’s worthlessness to him (of course, if Izuku wasn’t useless, surely he should’ve developed a good quirk too?), which is how “Deku” came to be. At the same time, Izuku “needed help with everything”, but he was also really helpful towards others. He was sensitive, emotional, but still brave -- someone like that was worrying to Katsuki even back then. Katsuki -- an ‘avoidant’ -- repressed his needs, while Izuku indulged in them, openly showing this ‘weakness’. This is where Piaget’s theory comes in. According to the theory, people develop “schemata” and “concepts” which are cognitive structures.

1. A schema is a mental representation which covers a range of behaviors, e.g.: a child learns to pick up a bottle. It learns that it can pick up other things too, so the action of picking something up becomes a schema. 2. A concept is a mental structure which relates to the environment. A concept of an object entails for example what that object does, what it’s used for, and its relation to other objects. Children develop concepts and schemata very early on, and after that there are two processes which occur heavily in the first few years, and then continue throughout life: 1. Assimilation -- new information is modified to fit existing schemata/concepts. For example, a child making engine sounds while playing with a block of wood has assimilated the block into their concept of a car.

2. Accommodation -- the new information can’t fit into existing schemata/concepts, so new ones have to be made. This is part of changing worldviews -- let’s say a little boy only has two categories for animals: birds and fish. But then he sees a dog. If he says “that’s a fish”, he has assimilated the new information, but if he makes up a whole new category of animals, then he has accommodated the new information. There are periods of life in which a child will assimilate more than it accommodates (and vice versa). Piaget called these periods “cognitive equilibrium”. The counterpart is “disequilibrium”. This might be part of something which happens during the first few years of life -- there is an explosion of neurons, brain cells, during this time. When the accommodation has occurred, the child will go back to assimilating. Katsuki developed a lot during kindergarten, and therefore created lots of new concepts and schemata. For example, “I am awesome and everyone else is not”, is a cognitive scheme which enables one to enact their superiority over others. “Deku is useless and I can hit him” is another such concept. However, ‘Deku’s uselessness’ is something Katsuki came up with as a defense mechanism -- as stated before, Izuku indulged in (normal) behavior which Katsuki saw as weakness. But, as any child, he still experienced anxieties and wanted affection. This went against his conviction that sensitivity was weakness, so Katsuki projected all these needs onto Izuku. Punishing Izuku then became a way of punishing himself for the things he wanted. This worked for a while, but then Katsuki became aware of the fact that Izuku was brave enough to go against him, and not only that, but look down on him enough to assume he could need help. He, the most awesome person ever.

This could mean two things.

Sensitivity is not weakness, and it’s not wrong to want it

Katsuki is still so weak that even people like Izuku are a threat

Accommodation is a more difficult process than assimilation, so Katsuki avoided changing his view of sensitivity, which was so deeply ingrained, by adopting the second possibility. But this was scary, and incredibly disturbing to Katsuki, which meant the hostility towards Izuku especially grew. So this is when the bullying picked up a bit. Stage four -- 6 - 12 years During this stage most children begin going to school, the stakes and expectations are higher, etc. I believe Katsuki thrived in a school environment too, with steadily increasing levels of challenge. This is also when both Katsuki’s and Izuku’s admiration for All Might increased, for different reasons. In Katsuki’s eyes, All Might was so strong he always won no matter what, which enabled him to get in more fights. Winning these fights fueled his ego, and he began believing he could surpass All Might. Stage five -- 13 - 18 years Ooh, here’s when it gets juicy. I believe the bullying might not have been too intense back in stage 4. Erikson defined this stage as “identity against role diffusion”. During their teen years, most people begin identifying all the different sorts of roles they have in life, which might cause some anxiety. That’s why a lot of teenagers are experimenting with their identity, and go through what adults often disregard as “phases”. This searching is very important however, because every person needs to have a secure sense of “this is me” to be mentally healthy. We need to believe there’s a core in our identity, which will stay the same even if we or our surroundings change. Middle school Katsuki and Izuku are both 14 when the series starts. Katsuki is still delusional, prideful, and narcissistic. His teachers think he is powerful enough that it’s inevitable he will go on to UA, which only confirms his view of himself. Right now he tries to act unbothered, but Katsuki is painfully aware of the fact that Izuku hasn’t abandoned the dream to be a hero, even though he is quirkless. All of Katsuki’s intimidation tactics -- blowing up the notebook, for example -- are all desperate attempts to discourage Izuku from even trying, because Katsuki is still scared and disturbed by Izuku in general. Perhaps more so than usual, because I think Katsuki’s trying to find his identity right now as well, especially since it’s time to apply to high school. “Leaving Izuku behind” might be the most symbolic thing Katsuki can think of. He feels as though he’s been stuck with Izuku for years, and wants to hammer home the differences between them, defining his own identity in the process. Still, Izuku is going to apply to UA. I know Katsuki looks pretty unbothered while telling Izuku to take a swan dive off the roof, but I’m 100% certain he’s absolutely shaking inside. It really is a last resort type of thing. Which doesn’t make it alright, of course, but I think it’s important to keep in mind that Katsuki by this point is a vulnerable young teen, unconsciously terrified of going into the world without knowing exactly who he is. Izuku’s response to this bullying and especially the swan-dive line are interesting to me. He doesn’t get depressed, instead he thinks to himself that the idiot Kacchan would have instigated a suicide if he really went through it. This is partly why I think Izuku is securely attached to his mom, even if he now doesn’t approach her with all his problems. He developed a strong sense of hope for the world, more on that in a bit. The Sludge Villain incident is a big stepping stone for both Katsuki and Izuku. We see Izuku genuinely almost give everything up after meeting All Might, and still, even as he saw someone who had bullied him, he still rushed in without a second thought as soon as that person seemed to need help. And in reality, Katsuki was asking for help. You can’t say this isn’t the face of someone who needs saving.

Of course, Katsuki catches up with Izuku just after the incident, telling him “I didn't need you to save me!”, the works.

He’s struggling really hard here to assimilate the new information. He doesn’t want to accept it. When he fell into the creek back as a child, I don’t think he actually needed any help, he probably would’ve been fine. The problem then was Izuku thinking he needed help, which he equated to being looked down upon. In this moment, the problem is that Katsuki really needed the help. Had Izuku not been there, not spurred All Might into action, Katsuki might very well have suffocated. And he knows this, he’s a smart kid. That’s why his reaction is so extreme this time. Accepting that he could’ve died if Izuku wasn’t there means, again, that there are two possibilities to Katsuki:

1. He is weak and needs Izuku’s help of all people 2. He has been wrong about sensitivity all along Both of these mean he has been wrong, both are unacceptable to him. But I think the first one, at least unconsciously, does become its own schemata. Some time after the incident Katsuki stays silent when it’s again noted that Izuku is applying for UA. On the first day there, he only tells Izuku to get out of his way, but doesn’t mock or question his presence. Izuku even comments that “ever since that day, he stopped tormenting me.” They even sit beside each other without any real problems. I think this again is due to two things: 1. Katsuki is hyper-focused on his real goals right then, he needs to do really well 2. He has accepted “Deku is applying for UA” as a new schemata, which is easier to swallow than accepting either the sensitivity or needing help thing.

High school -- UA There’s of course a minor hitch once Katsuki realises Izuku was accepted, but I think that’s fairly standard. What I think is more important for Katsuki is the fact that entering UA means coming into contact with other people his age who are more advanced than he would’ve ever thought. He’s been so far up that nobody could catch up to him for years, but suddenly, other people are merely steps away if not on the same level. The fact that other people are so close to surpassing him, and seeing Izuku has somehow developed a powerful quirk, opens the gate to the possibility that Izuku might surpass him too. As many have noticed, Katsuki is much more subdued since starting at UA. I think he’s beginning to warm up to other people (they’re not scared of him, he can’t dominate them like that). But I think his anxiety has slowly been growing, leading to the outburst/fight at Ground Beta, with All Might’s retirement as a final straw. I want to analyse him further (and even more how he’s affected by avoidant attachment!!!), but this will have to do for now. Please let me know what you thought, if you agree, if you’d like more, etc. It’s really encouraging. Have a nice day!

#long post #bnha #bnha meta #bnha psychology #psychology #bnha analysis #katsuki bakugou #bnha bakugou #kacchan #midoriya izuku #deku #bnha deku #boku no hero academia #my hero academia #bakudeku #psychological analysis #mitsuki bakugou

563 notes · View notes

aflawedfashion · 5 years ago

Note

unpopular opinion: the defiance finale was perfect

strongly agree | agree | neutral | disagree | strongly disagree

Thanks, you really wanted to set me off, huh? Ok, I’ll take the bait.

I love Defiance. I do. I would not make this post if I did not love Defiance enough to be this disappointed in it, so here we go...

Ok, so, Defiance was a show about people coming together. Obviously it’s not going to be pretty if you take people from several different planets (the aliens weren’t even all from the same planet), have them fight a a brutal war against each other that nearly destroyed the only planet they have left, and then tell them that it’s now time to play nice and be friends. It’s going to be messy. And that’s ok. There is no story without conflict, and this puts us at the perfect starting point for a whole lot of character development. Love it.

The endgame of the show should have been people finally coming together, but was it that? No, it was about the small group of characters who actually survived this brutal show finding an entire race of aliens that had to be shot off into space because they can’t kill them all, but they’re too dangerous to actually live with. Aliens played by black actors (although they are painted purple and I think the writers actually had good intentions when they created the Omec, you can’t not notice how terrible this turned out.... unless, I guess, you’re the people who wrote this). They were purple people eating aliens.

Other than T’evgin and Kindzi, the Omec never even had a voice, but the entire finale hinges on them. We see in their faces that they probably wouldn’t want to kill everyone if they knew more about the people of Earth, but we never get to see resolution to that. We never see them revolt against Kindzi. They never get to speak for themselves or fight for themselves or learn about the people of Earth. They just start eating everyone because the show wanted the main characters seem justified in shooting them. They’re treated like props.

The show wants Doc and Amanda to be seen as heroes for shooting the evil aliens (it frames them heroically when they do it), while also having Irisa be the hero for saying they should try to save them without ever giving the Omec a proper voice. You can’t do this all in two episodes and call it good. Nolan and Amanda had even stood up for the Omec until the very last moment, until Kindzi raped Nolan, killed her father, caged the people of earth, turned doc yewll into a slave, and ordered her followers to eat their enemies. Nolan and Amanda truly just wanted to do what was right and got hammered into the ground until they didn’t know what else to do. I get where they’re coming from. I get where Irisa’s coming from, but why are we here?

By giving the Omec a voice, there’s an arc to be found in these two episodes, and I can see what the writers were probably going for. I could even pretend I loved this episode and write a meta about the interesting parts of this kind of conflict, but it’s not actually developed in these episodes. They’d need an entire season arc, and I don’t really want that arc. Look, down to the basics, do I think we needed to end Defiance on purple people eating aliens? No. Cut the people eating and rewrite the finale, and the Omec could have been good in the end instead of a pile of shock value tropes stacked on top of each other (I forgot bring up that they were also incestuous). Their power, their status, their history with the Votans can exist without the people eating.

And what really bugs me about this is that there was a far superior finale arc in front of the writers that they left in 3x11 when Kindzi killed T’evgin. The VC were a great villain that had already been established and fit the core narrative of the show. They were scary, they were powerful, and they were a complex threat. We that even everyone in the VC doesn’t all agree, but they’d all level defiance if they needed to. So many potential conflicts here.

Silora Voske. Great character who liked Amanda, and genuinely wanted to make peace with Defiance, but peace with the VC means playing nice with the VC, something Amanda has never wanted. Silora would have shot Amanda in the back of the head if she betrayed her, no matter how good of friends they became. Now she’s dead and Defiance will be blamed. So much potential.

There is no government above Amanda in Defiance. With the United States long gone and the E-Rep’s power only lasting a season, Defiance is free from any larger government or country, and Amanda wants to keep it that way. Unfortunately for her, the VC wants more power, and Defiance is just this little town all on its own trying to swat away every fascist government that tries to take over.

And that’s where the Omec should have come into these last few episodes. We have all these Omec on a spaceship, why make them cannon fodder when you could bring them together with Defiance to fight against a common enemy - an enemy who wanted to divide humans and Votans. It would have made this a story about people coming together, exactly what the show wanted to be in the beginning.

Now for the characters, the reason I love this show, the reason this finale makes me emotionally mad at it on top of being frustrated by the plot.

Nolan and Irisa. They had been wandering around the country for 15 years with this vague goal that one day they’d get to Antarctica. They didn’t even know if it was paradise or not, and honestly, it didn’t really matter because they weren’t really trying to get there. In 15 years, they traveled from Denver to Defiance/St. Louis. That’s not very far. Truthfully, I doubt they ever really tried to get to Antarctica, but getting there wasn’t the point. Everyone needs something to live for, a dream, thoughts of a better future. Antarctica was just a fantasy that gave them a reason to live in a shitty world.

But then they get to Defiance, and Nolan instantly finds a purpose and meets people who give him hope that the world he actually lives in might not be entirely horrible. He tells Irisa that Antarctica’s not real, but Defiance is. They can make a difference here. They can be happy. There’s no more reason to chase after a fantasy. He becomes a better, more hopeful person by finding a reason to get up in the morning and finding people he can believe in.

But... then in the finale, he just gets shot into space and Irisa makes a joke that he’s going to be flirting with alien princesses and getting in trouble. What is this negative character development the show is trying to sell me as a good ending for Nolan? Why are we resetting him to back before he found a purpose? Can male writers really never let go of their Han Solo fantasy from when they were 13, and let these characters grow as they deserve, as they already had?

Nolan spent 3 seasons talking about how he’s a one woman guy, even breaking off a friends with benefits relationship when he realizes he’s in love with Amanda. He thinks Amanda’s into someone else at the time, but he still can’t be with someone else when he’s in love with her, even when his fuck buddy doesn’t care because it’s a meaningless sexual relationship. Nolan doesn’t deserve to be reduced to the guy who drives around and has funny sexual escapades (and although I’m sure he’s had a few funny one night stands in his life, he had sex with three women in three seasons, and all relationships lasted more than one episode, note: I will not count rape in this total, so why are they trying to sell me on the idea that funny sexual escapades are a defining characteristic of his?)

Nolan deserved to find actual, real, attainable happiness with Amanda and his daughter, not get tossed into space away from the people he loves on some writer’s dumbass teenage Han Solo fantasy.

And Amanda, the love of both Nolan’s life and mine, she has been emotionally destroyed by the show, and very nearly physically destroyed as well. The writers wanted her to die a martyr, and only backed out of it when they realized there was no one qualified to be mayor in season 4, and they finally realized that killing all your characters for shock value actually has consequences. She deserved better than that.

Before the end of the finale, she thought Nolan would come back because he always did. She had hope for herself and for him. They were going to be be together and be happy. She deserved to be happy. And then in the final lines of the series, Irisa says Amanda thinks Nolan is dead. Where’s her hope? Why did the writers take that from her? Amanda is the person who made everyone want to be better. She gave people hope when they had none. Amanda represented the possibility that all these people could live together, and the writers wanted her to die while she was shooting aliens. They wanted to kill the person who represented the hope that humans and aliens could live together, and yeah, that pretty much sums up the finale.

And they don’t kill her. Instead, they just leave her sad, alone in her office, and without hope.

Thanks.

I hate it.

This episode pieces together a bunch of action, drama, and emotional moments to make you feel a lot of things as you watch it, but it’s not good on any deeper level. It betrayed everything I loved about this show, so I hate this finale.

#lochley #aff watches defiance #sorry this is long and I rambled a lot and should probably edit it more #you probably didn't ask for this #but well #here's my feelings #not sure I even covered everything lol #actually pretty sure I didn't #i have a strange dislike of the idea of irisa/alak being romantic but that's just a ship I'm not that into that didn't actually happen #not that huge of a deal #but still didn't like that they were setting that up #i dislike it more than I would expect... idk... i just don't want them together #that's a footnote of a complaint compared to everything else

12 notes · View notes