#like I said no matter in what form

[sugarcubetikki]

If you didn’t know, Christian Linke recently said that they weren’t intending to make Jayce and Viktor romantic but just to show a really close relationship between men which they believe is underrepresented in media.

Of course, as expected, antis have taken this as a way to shut down gay interpretations and bring up how “romanticising a relationship that is meant to be brotherly demeans it”. It is definitely important to have relationships that depict multiple forms of love and yes at its core we can all agree that Jayce and Viktor are two men who love each other.

I believe that despite what Christian Linke says, the way one chooses to interpret that love ultimately falls on the viewer, as their relationship/love can resonate with people in many different ways.

I personally view Jayvik to be partners, friends and lovers because it resonates with me as a queer fan. I personally see a lot of queercoding in the way they were written and that makes it hard for me to perceive them as not having a romantic love.

For example:

Viktor being shown to take Mel’s place in many scenes like Jayce hallucinating him with after Mel and he’s wearing her black eyeshadow.

Mel x Jayce sex scene overlaps with the scene of Viktor becoming entwined with the Hexcore in a way that it makes it difficult for you to even focus on Mel and Jayce.

Amanda mentioning that Viktor was projecting his relationship with Jayce onto Sky this season - the whole science-y bond.

Viktor making the “this is not the bedroom” joke when Mel catches him and Jayce trying to sneak into the lab.

This all resonates with me as queer comphet and their love for each other being superior to that of their romantic interests also feels very queer for me.

And I have the right to interpret them in that way. I respect the way Christian Link interprets them and has shown to depict them but I personally do not see their relationship in the same way and I believe characters are just as much as the audience’s as they are the creators so my interpretation is also valid.

(Also, creators genuinely don’t always agree with each other and they differ in opinions when it comes to interpretations of characters/relations whilst Christian Linke may not see their love as romantic. I believe there might be other creators who do which could explain some of the ambiguity in their scenes).

Also, to the antis, queer love is also a valid form of love, it can exist with/without physical intimacy and still be queer.

Perceiving Jayvik as queer does not demean their love for each other at all. Perceiving them as having a platonic or brotherly bond isn’t wrong either. All forms of love are pure. Queer or not. Jayce and Viktor’s love for each other is pure and can be seen no matter how you interpret it.

The beauty of a story or a piece of art is enabling the perceived to interpret it in a way it resonates with them and it may not be what the creator intended and it may not be what resonates with you but it is still a valid interpretation.

That is to say I also respect platonic readings of their relationship despite not personally seeing it because you have the right to interpret them in the way you want to. And I am asking you to do the same for me and give me the right to interpret them in the way I want to.

[liquidstar]

look this site really is awful for ppl with OCD so i just wanna reassure anyone that you are not Tainted Forever for consuming a piece of media with questionable content. the fact that youre able to recognize it speaks to your critical thinking skills, which is good, certain depictions should be critiqued. but you dont need to ruminate on it to the point where you begin to feel guilty for simply witnessing gross or creepy writing choices. you dont have to vindicate yourself to the fictional tumblr discourser inside your head, saying that youre now a bad person bc you watched the wrong anime. your actual response to it still matters of course, but thats that and this is this. just seeing it is neutral, you didnt commit a thought crime. its literally fine.

IF YOU ARE USING THIS POST TO ONLY FURTHER YOUR STUPID PEDANTIC BLACK-AND-WHITE DISCOURSE TO GET A "GOCHA" OVER THE OTHER SIDE YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. DON'T USE OUR DISORDER TO VINDICATE YOUR BEHAVIOR. THOUGHT CRIMES ARENT REAL BUT ACTIONS STILL MATTER. PEOPLE WITH OCD ARE CAPABLE OF THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT OUR ACTIONS AND RESPONSES, EVEN WITH INTRUSIVE THOUGHTS AND RUMINATIONS. TREATING US AS IF WE CANNOT, ONLY TO FORCE US TO USE YOUR STRINGENT UNNUANCED DISCOURSE OPINIONS ABOUT "PURITY CULTURE" (TRIGGERING TO THOSE WITH OCD) AS THE ONLY REASONABLE GUIDE DOES MORE TO EXACERBATE OUR OBSESSIONS THAN HELP US. YOU ARE THE ISSUE AS WELL. YOU ARE ALSO THE TUMBLR DISCOURSER INSIDE OUR HEADS. DO NOT USE US FOR YOUR DISCOURSE. WE ARE PEOPLE, NOT HYPOTHETICALS TO USE TO EXPLAIN IF YOUR FROZEN INCEST FANFICTION IS OKAY OR NOT. TREATING US AS IF WE CANNOT AUTONOMOUSLY HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS ON WHEN MEDIA IS TANGIBLY HARMFUL IS ABLEIST. FORCING US TO ABIDE BY YOUR IN-GROUP'S SET OF UNEQUIVOCAL MORALS IS ABLEIST. ACTING AS THOUGH THE ONLY SOLUTION FOR US IS MINDLESS MEDIA CONSUMPTION IN WHICH "EVERY DEPICTION OF XYZ, NO MATTER HOW POORLY DONE OR EXPLOITATIVE, IS ALWAYS OKAY AND IF YOU DISAGREE YOURE ACTUALLY AN EVIL 'ANTI'" IS ABLEIST. THOSE ARE THE SAME BLACK-AND-WHITE MORALS THAT SEND US INTO OBSESSIVE SPIKES, BUT FLIPPED. A SET OF MORALS IN WHICH QUESTIONING THE IMPACT OF A PIECE OF WORK MAKES YOU AN "EVIL CONSERVATIVE PURITAN "ANTI"" DOES NOT HELP MORAL OCD.

YOU ARE THE DAMN TUMBLR DISCOUERSERS MAKING THIS SHIT WORSE FOR US! YOURE THE EXACT SAME BUT WITH FLIPPED BUZZWORDS! YOU'RE MISSING THE WHOLE DAMN POINT!

[sskk-manifesto]

Bungou Stray Dogs: Dead Apple and how “ability users” (opposite to “normal people”) learning to accept themselves through the acceptance of their own abilities is a queer metaphor of acceptance of own's sexual orientation and gender: an essay by me

[crookedfivefingers]

3.13 | ᴛʜᴇ ʟᴀꜱᴛ ᴏꜰ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʟᴏʀᴅꜱ

link to the post I accidentally wound up prattling endlessly about in the tags 💀

[batwingsandblackcats]

Absolutely fascinated by Laudna’s “she has a debt to pay. She owes me her life like she took mine.”

This isn’t just a “I’m worth nothing so might as well smoke em if I got em” mindset with Delilah. It’s some of that, but it’s not the whole picture.

This is “might as well smoke em if I got em, and if this is the end of me god damn it I am taking this bitch with me.”

[zer0point5ive]

dadbod lawrence. sound of everyone cheering !

[sysig]

Getting closer, getting really close now I swear (Patreon)

[charliextea]

has it ever occurred to anyone that the black and white thinking of anti-/pro- language is a trauma response and we all probably need therapy? and like, life is not actually black and white almost ever??? because human beings are complicated? and forcing yourself to pick a side and draw a line in the sand all the time is probably really bad for our mental health collectively?

[my-thoughts-and-junk]

finally watching channel zero and i immediately have so many thoughts in the first ten minutes

[eisthenameofme]

"you are not immune to propaganda/cult indoctrination" is largely useful and the sort of shit it's used to point out as not making you immune (being "smart" or a certain degree of educated, etc) is worth pointing out and it never feels like the appropriate place to mention it, but a lot of people seem to be conflating "the things people think make them immune to this kind of thing doesn't because it doesn't work that way" along with "the same conditions that make people more vulnerable to indoctrination/conspiritorial thinking/etc can happen to anyone" with "everyone in the world is equally vulnerable to every kind of indoctrination under the same conditions" and i just don't think that's objectively true.

It may be true that someone started out holding one belief and flipped to hold the apparently opposite belief, but does that actually mean everyone who holds that belief is equally liable to change their mind? Why did they hold that belief in the first place? Is it consistent with their values and what they care about more broadly, and do they specically go out of their way to combat the potential for misinformation and propaganda? Are they prone to making their decisions based on what the people around or closest to them think instead of thinking for themselves? To what extent do they base their values and decsions on kneejerk emotional reactions? (these aren't the only factors obviously, just examples of other potential contributing factors) It is not a given that everyone will answer these questions in the same way, and this is part of why different people respond differently in similar situations. Also not everyone will respond positively to techniques that often work to draw people in (eg lovebombing is a common tactic that works on a lot of people, but may be actively offputting or ring alarm bells for others; different people have different tolerances for attempts at social control and some might nope out the moment they see it attempted regardless of any other factors).

"You Yes Even You" can be an important tactic to get people who wouldn't otherwise to legitimately consider why these tactics work on people and what might work on them and keep in mind that the people it Does happen to usually aren't aware of it and it's not always their fault the way it's often presented, but that is not objectively the same thing as "anyone can fall down any pipeline not matter what forever"

like maybe no one is literally "immune to propaganda" but if a type of propoganda is something that necessarily hinges on X mechanism and a person is notorious for both intellectually and instinctively being violently opposed to X. then yeah I think the propoganda that hinges on X is probably going to be a Very Difficult to Impossible sell, even potentially under coercion, especially if that person has already demonstrated that they are willing to put themeslves at risk/resist that kind of coercion about it. unless your argument is that there is scp level literal mind control happening.

[heartofstanding]

tagged by @nebylitsa - Nine of my favourite books (well, 13 really since I included two trilogies in omnibus form), in no particular order.

tagging: @skeleton-richard, @oldshrewsburyian, @shredsandpatches @themalhambird @ardenrosegarden @themidnightcircusshow No pressure if you don't want to though!

[ectonurites]

i love when i make a placeholder guess about a Real Life Thing while writing a fic and later when i go to look it up my guess was actually correct

[zo1nkss]

CJ literally called Ed a slur multiple times on-screen to his face, so if you're really going to get upset at BIPOC for feeling vindicated that the white man who's still alive is actually learning to treat Ed like a person, but you don't say shit to ppl who are casual CJ enjoyers about his racism and how he has not unlearned a single lick of it because he died instead, you can actually fuck all the way off.

[allofuswantgwinam]

my mom literally wants to be clueless and im so sick of hearing her say that

[skitskatdacat63]

Bwoahh thank you for the lore. It’s really interesting to see the spectrum of views towards humans. Their feelings are so different yet they’re so similar (like night and day lmao) . Rip Goddess of Earth for having to deal with those two for a millennia. Love to hear more about these two <3

— Penalanon

Aaaaaahh yes!!! That's my main intention with my god ocs tbh. Two things: what is their view towards humans(A), and what governing style do they believe is most effective(B)? And I guess also to an extent, how do they feel about interplanetary relations, but that's a bit too meta 😭 I just think Luna and Sola are an interesting case study because they're so uninvolved compared to all the others. But yeah 😭 they are so similar, but ofc they'll never see it. I like to think they're both fascinated but one is like this 😍 and the other is like this 😟

But here I will give you the thoughts of some other gods regarding the two things I mentioned earlier, bcs I think it's a fun thing to play with. At some point I'll have to make a chart like the political compass one about this lol.

Earth(Eden)

A: They're creatures of the land with their own autonomy and goals

B: I will not interfere, it is also my duty to observe and come in only when really, truly needed(read: never.)

Saturn(Sabah):

A: They're like toys I can play with and manipulate.

B: Proxy wars are fun! I love anarchy and chaos! I will play to each side at will, and switch whenever it gets boring.

Neptune(Nikola):

A: They're my citizens whom I govern and watch over. I love to see their creations, its interesting to see what they come up with!

B: I am like a monarch, I can carry out my will through the people if need be but I don't micromanage them.

Uranus(Ustinya)

A: They are like my children, even if I don't understand them all the time, I still care for them and watch over them.

B: I am like a figurehead and advisor. I won't get involved too much unnecessarily, but I am honored they look to me for guidance, advice and encouragement.

There's others but these are the ones that came to mind first so :D I feel like most of them are pretty rational...and then there's Sabah 😭 I need to make more of them a bit evil I think

[sysig]

I like him a normal amount (lying) (Patreon)