#like purely in canon like textually evident.

[lizlemondyke]

sadie and katherine are a great example of that kind of woman relationship where people are like "...huh. they're pretty close." and like, don't really think anything of it. but they notice. they clock it. something is there and it is clear.

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

Wanted to ask, is Eridan's relationship with his dad ok? Like when Eridan was learning how to use his harpoon gun he seemed very much distressed and not enjoying any of it

The only real canon characterization we have of seahorsedad is that the version of him that's Cronus's lusus is "stern, fatherly" and that he ditches Cronus for Hussie, although that last one is mostly just a Bit so I don't really count it as characterization. He's also willing to go along with Eridan "doing something ridiculous," though, again, that's kind of a Bit and it's unclear how canon that is.

((cw for abuse and stuff beneath the readmore))

As such, pretty much anything I say is going to be pure extrapolation that serves my characterization of Eridan, and I can't really back it up with hard textual evidence. But, personally, I think Eridan believes his relationship with his lusus is "good" in the way that many children growing up beneath strict, emotionally neglectful, and even outright abusive parents do.

We know that Eridan has very few friends. He doesn't even really talk to half the people in their group chat, and according to Feferi, he's never spent more than a few days underwater, total, in his whole life. Add onto that that lusus murder (and, by extension, the culling of the orphaned troll) has been his duty long enough that he describes it is "the only thing i evver did," I think it's a reasonable assumption to make that he also has no IRL friends, aside from Feferi.

And to give an idea of how old Eridan was when he started having to murder lusii, here's how old Vriska was when she was expected to start feeding spidermom:

This, and the fact that Dualscar was called "Orphaner" because the job of feeding Gl'bgolyb was his even into adulthood (as he lived before the Summoner's rebellion and the removal of adult trolls from Alternia), and the fact that no one, including Feferi, ever shows any gratitude towards Eridan for performing the job, supports the idea that feeding Gl'bgolyb has always been a violet blood's responsibility. After all, Feferi makes overtures about not being better than other trolls, but she sure does revel in being royalty when she can get away with it. It'd be in character for her to not be particularly grateful to Eridan because she sees lusus murder as fundamentally being his responsibility, especially if he started when they were both REALLY young.

In other words, Eridan was expected to start murdering lusii (and by extension, other trolls) from the moment he was old enough to do so, which, judging by how old Vriska was when she started killing trolls for Spidermom, is not very old at all.

Also, given the lifespan of violet bloods, it's entirely possible - and my personal belief - that Seahorsedad was Dualscar's lusus as well as Eridan's. Even without that being the case, since it was always Eridan's job to hunt and kill lusii, the biggest possible culprit for inducting him into his role would be his lusus.

And let's be clear, I think the fact that having to murder lusii/trolls is the biggest culprit for what's fucked Eridan up the most. The pressure of having the safety of the entire race on his shoulders, the fear of Gl'bgolyb and what happens if he ever fails, and the guilt of taking lives (which we do know Eridan thinks about) have left him with genuine struggles caring about other people, a nasty martyr complex (which isn't unjustified), extremely unstable and negative emotions, shattered interpersonal relationships, and a deep, nihilistic sense of resignation towards his place in society. The latter has directly led to him attempting to embrace that place by tricking himself into thinking he believes in hemocasteist, sea dweller supremacy rhetoric - which his actions contradict - because, without the game's intervention, he had no other options available for him but to become a key figure in the imperial army, continue murdering other sapient creatures until he died, and watch all his few friends die before him, either when they got culled, killed on the battlefield, or purely dropped dead of old age.

And, like... a parent who does that to their child, even if we assume the absolute best (that Seahorsedad does genuinely care about Eridan), can't possibly have a fully healthy relationship with said child. And I think it's not unreasonable to assume that the best is not what's happening between Eridan and Seahorsedad, because Eridan's psychological profile is so fucked up that I highly doubt he was receiving much, if any, actual affection or support from his lusus. Personally, I think his lusus was "stern and fatherly" in the worst possible way - high expectations, no emotional warmth, and complete disregard for Eridan's psychological well-being, as long as he was producing adequate results.

Because Eridan craves attention, and has very little distinction between good and bad attention. He's naive and trusting to a fault, hardly ever suspects anybody of lying to him, and has basically no social skills. These all say to me that Seahorsedad is just, like... not giving him any emotional attention at ALL.

And poor Eridan is just 13 years old - still too young to fully realize how poorly he's being treated by people who are supposed to care about him. Like, yeah, he's completely obnoxious and exhausting to talk to, and you can't really blame Feferi or Kanaya for being sick of listening to him, but at the same time, some of the shit they do to him as a result is honestly just mean. Like Kanaya is just actually bullying him- training him up to be a wizard as a joke, shitting on him behind his back with Rose, making fun of him to his face - and yet:

He's just that fucking desperate for people to care about him and support him; I can't help but think he's just not getting that at home, you know?

So I think if you asked Eridan, he'd say that his relationship with his lusus was good, and that his lusus was proud and noble and stoic, and absolutely a great custodian, and there were no problems at all.

But I think if you were to dig deeper into their relationship, you'd start to hear worrying things like that Eridan never got to celebrate Twelfth Perigrees, and was instead dragged out to go lusus hunting because it was particularly easy to do so on that day. Or that his lusus had to pull the trigger FOR him the first time they ever went hunting, because his own hands were shaking too hard. Or that he'd be locked out of the hive every time he cried, until he stopped crying altogether. Or that he thinks he's never been sick a day in his life because he was never allowed to have an off day and not go hunting and now he's just used to ignoring any and all symptoms. So on and so forth.

He reacts EXTREMELY POORLY to Feferi saying she feels like she needed to look after him - more poorly than to the initial news that she was trying to break up with him:

And I think that's because weakness was punished in his household growing up. He wasn't allowed to be weak - he was nobility, royalty. He had duties, responsibilities. If he faltered, their whole race died. And when you consider the fact that "you have to kill things for the good of everyone you care about, all the time, constantly," is the abject lesson that's been hammered into him since he was old enough to walk and talk, the fact that he's so incredibly fucking adamant about murdering angels starts to be a little... sad. He's just stuck in that mindset. He doesn't know how to escape it.

So... yeah. In summary: his relationship with his dad is great!

[mxtxfanatic]

@reinedeslys-central While I am enjoying our convo on that other post, I figured it would better to move it off of op's post since they haven't engaged with it. So in response to your last reblog, I don't think we're really disagreeing with each other for the most part, but I do have a question for you about when you said this:

It's weird for me to think he actually feels no remorse over his actions with the wen remnants though, because, hey, killing innocent people, so I guess that's why I'm more inclined to that interpretation of mixed feelings?

Why do you feel this way? Why is it "weird" that Jiang Cheng feel no remorse about this in canon? He certainly doesn't show remorse about it at any point in the text. He certainly never thinks about the wrongs he committed against the Wen remnants in the text as "wrongs." Jiang Cheng has a reputation for attacking, torturing, and killing a lot of people off the strength of his hatred for Wei Wuxian and the QishanWen along with him just being an overall bully (like at the Dafan Mountain hunt where he attacks smaller cultivators to force them to leave the competitive nighthunt). For me, to say that it would be strange for Jiang Cheng not to feel remorse is like saying it would be "strange" if Xue Yang didn't feel bad for all those villages he tricked Xiao Xingchen into massacring. Xue Yang didn't see those villagers as people deserving of life. Jiang Cheng didn't see the Wen remnants as people deserving of life, either.

Jiang Cheng brought Jiang Yanli to see Wei Wuxian because Jiang Yanli asked for it. Just like Wei Wuxian was invited to Jin Ling's 100-day celebration because Jiang Yanli asked for it, not because Jin Zixuan wanted to be nice all of a sudden. Jiang Cheng shouldn't get the credit for the idea just because he fulfilled it. On that note, the defection duel was agreed upon by Wei Wuxian and Jiang Cheng because Wei Wuxian refused to return the Wen remnants to the labor camp, and Jiang Cheng kept saying that it would affect the Jiang's reputation that he would do such a public thing while still a part of their clan. In this story, reputation doesn't mean shit if you have the power to put your money where your mouth is. But Jiang Cheng's character is that he is always seeking approval from figures he considers more esteemed than himself. So he could have stood up against the Jin and been fine, just like the Jin stood up for Xue Yang and were fine. His refusal to do so was pure vanity, not strategy.

As for how the Jiang were left off after the war: Jiang Cheng and Wei Wuxian didn't have to rebuild because Lotus Pier was never destroyed. Wen Chao and co. were living in it because it was the supervisory office. The only thing damaged in the place were the lotus symbols that the QishanWen had intentionally defaced. Whatever wealth the Jiang had was either kept in Lotus Pier, meaning it was reclaimed immediately with the reclamation of Lotus Pier, or it was transferred to Qishan, which means it was reclaimed after the war ended. On top of all that, all of the land and wealth of the QishanWen were split amongst the victorious clans of the Sunshot Campaign, likely with the biggest clans who contributed the most receiving the largest cut. Since Wei Wuxian was a one-man army key to the Sunshot Campaign's victory, that means the Jiang would get a good portion of this bounty, which means they would be richer than when the war started. And Jiang Cheng had recruited disciples during the war, while Wei Wuxian drew in cultivators during and after with his new cultivation. There's not a single piece of textual evidence that suggests the Jiang were struggling after the war, not material-wise and not reputation-wise. It was only Jiang Cheng who wanted to attach himself to the Jin Clan by any means necessary because the Jin were very overtly trying to fill the power vacuum that the QishanWen left behind in their downfall, and Jiang Cheng wanted on the boat.

[enlitment]

d'Alembert's Dream (and why you should read it)

I feel like I need to put my (very scattered) thoughts down.

Don't expect much academic value, the text absolutely deserves an in-depth analysis but it's currently so hot in Prague and my brain is just running off on iced coffee & vibes

it also a sort of continuation of this post which finally pushed me to start looking more into Diderot! (thanks to @frevandrest for kick-starting the interesting thread ✨)

Few gems (indiscreet jewels?) from d'Alambert's Dream in no particular order:

It reads like a philosophical dialogue between to equal partners one of whom is a woman

Another feminist brownie point for Denis? It does get a tad bit mainsplain-y at times, but not more than any texts that would be published in the 21st century.

The majority of the text is a dialogue is between a doctor and Mme l'Espinasse, who is consistently portrayed as curious and intelligent. She asks interesting questions, understands what the doctor is talking about almost immediately most of the times and she even comes up with one of the central allegories/metaphors (the spider one!) than then runs through the text.

It was honestly refreshing to read.

The doctor also tells a story about a woman overcoming her mental health issues with regular training and pure strength of will, all on her own! (I'm not saying it's realistic or that it's not often necessary to seek help but purely on the gender discussion level, you can see how a story like that grants women a lot of agency, right? Love to see it!)

2. The format is hilarious

So I've long held the opinion that it's a real shame that most contemporary philosophy feels very dry in comparison to past centuries when they just wrote some of their deepest thoughts in the most bizarre format imaginable.

This one follows a dialogue format that can be perhaps best described as 'I argued with my friend too hard about philosophy the night before and now he's having a weird nightmarish experience. Let's have this doctor record him talking in his sleep. Oh, and Mme. l'E is also there for some reason.'

(plus it canonically features d'Alambert in a sleeping robe and a night cap!!)

3. Not only not that sexist but also Gender™?

It's only one paragraph and of course, it's a product of it's time but still, it does talk about blurring the lines between the male and female biological sex in an interesting (though outdated) way. Don't let anyone convince you that discussions about gender are a 21st century invention!

4. I'd also lovingly describe the text as an 'epistemological discussion with palpable erotic tension', aka:

No honestly there's much more tension between the Doctor (a very obvious Diderot self-insert) and Mme l’Espinasse than in your average Netflix wannabe period drama.

It features gems such as:

a passage in which they discuss bodily sensations and the sense of touch in which the doctor proceeds to asks Mme. l'E about female orgasm. Or something very close to that. In a very hush-hush 1700s coded language kind of way, but still?

she also says something that the doctor deems to be really smart, after which he asks for a permission to hug her (weird. but yay for consent?), at which point d'Alambert wakes up, sees the two hugging and comments that it is 'very much like him to do something like that'

There's also links to mental health and interesting parallels between the text and my thesis! Also Voltaire mentions, because of course.

I read it in Czech but I should be able to look up the receipts... I mean textual evidence upon request if anyone happens to be interested!

[noemitenshi]

You mentioned before you had a theory Troy is a virgin. Why is that?

Hi nonny :) I gotta be honest with you, it's pure vibes 😂😂😂

Ok, let my try a more serious answer... So, there's not a lot of textual evidence either way… however. Fromt what we are shown of Troy in s3, he seems very much to be an all or nothing guy. Means, at least for me, that I can't see him having had casual sex. If he did have sex I think he had to be deeply in love with this person(s). But since he makes no reference to love lost or anything like that, not even once, not even a little, I don't think he'd been in love before. Additionally, consider his dating pool; I think it is rather small. Sure there are other people on the ranch he could've dated but again nothing like that is shown in canon (like what I could believe is that he had something going on with Mike… or well, I could understand if people thought that haha). But overall he doesn't seem interested in anyone on the ranch in that way. Then there's of course the nearest town (where he presumably went to school, and then later on where just Jake went to school)… I think his bad reputation probably made the rounds there, too, so it's not like people were lining up to meet him… And I don't think that Troy sought out social situations like, dunno, going out partying or whatever. Later on hanging out in a bar.. can't see that either honestly. He doesn't seem interested in "frivolous" things like this. Then there's Jake's friends, as potential partners. Though I think Jake warned everyone he brought around off Troy. I also believe that he didn't really bring people over often - ashamed of his family, his drunk parents, his out of control brother… So even if Troy tried to hang out with them I think Jake made sure he didn't feel welcome (I think he may have humiliated him… Troy's not easy to scare off but humiliation from his family (=ppl he cares about) might work. I base this on his reaction when Madison went "wanna be a mama's boy?" and all that). So yeah, I get the sense that Troy hasn't experienced love yet (and thus no sex) which is why he's so responsive to Madison and later on Nick - though I think in both cases this isn't a romantic love - if you favor another HC that's valid too :) Just not my cup of tea. In either case he's been starved for love/affection all his life, is my point.

(Also personally, I just love writing Troy as a virgin, experiencing his first time late in life, every touch felt so strongly, the way he'll get overwhelmed so quickly from almost innocent touches, a few kisses… the wide-eyed, trembling expression he's sure to make at his s.o. as if they are his world, his lifeline… It's a lot of fun)

Thank you so much for the ask and have a great day 🧡

[from-the-coffee-shop-in-edoras]

I see you very much as an expert on all things Rohirrim, so I bring to you this question, hoping I can pick your brain for info to use in my own fics (full disclosure). 😅

It seems to be a popular fanon that the Rohirrim/Riders of Rohan have tattoos, and that body art is a part of their culture. Do you have any thoughts or personal HCs about this that you're willing to share?

Thank you in advance! I appreciate you and your blog so much (if you didn't already know that).

Oh my goodness!!! I am so very honored to be thought of as a person who is knowledgeable about my beloved Rohirrim, and I hope very much that I can live up to that reputation. Thank you!!!

I’m not aware of any real textual evidence for body art among the Rohirrim, and the historical record in the medieval Anglo Saxon and Norse societies that Tolkien used as a reference for them seems to be disputed. But I absolutely understand and agree with the conventional wisdom that tattoos are a thing in Rohan. It just fits well with a warrior culture that has a wilder, dare-I-say more pagan aesthetic as compared to the smooth solemnity of Gondor or the formal elegance of the elves. And since they’re a culture that doesn’t document things in written words, pictorial representations such as tattoos and body art would be one way to fill that gap (along with their songs and oral traditions).

In my mind, tattoos in Rohan are common but basic—they’ve really only got the technology for the “stick and poke” method so the designs are kept simple because anything too elaborate is difficult to pull off well. They’re mostly in black line (using soot) but some have color using powder made from grinding up certain dried roots and plants.

Each village/community has its own distinctive tattoo motif that is worn by all of that community’s members. So you can tell just by looking at someone whether they’re from Upbourn (a fish because it’s a river town) or Dunharrow (mountain peaks since they’re in the White Mountains) or Everholt (a boar in honor of the wild boar that live in this part of the Firien Wood), etc. And soldiers also tend to share tattoo designs specific to their éored—getting your éored’s mark is a formal rite of passage for the younger members when they first get assigned to their company. These shared tattoo designs are important both for group cohesion and as a means of identifying fallen Rohirrim even if the deceased isn’t known to whoever finds the body.

Beyond these ritualized and practical functions, I do also like to think that there are some purely decorative tattoos among them as a means of personal expression and/or to help cover small scars that so many Rohirrim have from battle, riding accidents or other mishaps. Obviously horse-based designs would be very popular, as well as other flora and fauna of Rohan. But they’re a very sentimental people and so I think little emotional signifiers would also be very common (again, especially because they generally don’t have a means to pay tribute to beloved people/things in written form, this sort of symbol would serve the purpose of making some kind of record of those tributes).

In terms of specific people in my head canon: Éomer has a little simbelmynë blossom for each of the major figures in his life that he’s lost (forearm). Háma had a sun to remind him of his wife, who brought warmth and light to his life (shoulder). Théodred had stars in the shape of a particular constellation that is visible every year on his mother’s birthday (chest). Éowyn has a representation of her father’s sword (left wrist) and gets a quill (right wrist) to represent Faramir after they get married. (Faramir got a little running horse in her honor on his first trip to Rohan. He was glad he did it, but he never wants to sit through that again.)

Merry brought tattooing back to the Shire when he showed up with a tobacco pipe on his bicep (both for its association with Buckland and in tribute to Théoden, whose last words to Merry were about smoking together someday when peace was restored). Unsurprisingly, tattoos did not catch on with the other hobbits, but Merry remains very proud of it.

Anywayyyy…I hope that was in any way helpful! Thanks so much for asking!! I remain a huge fan and am so grateful to you for helping convince me to put some of my thoughts and stories out there vs keeping them all in the confines of my own Google drive!

[mdzs-fanon-exposed]

Introductory post: Please read! :)

hi everyone! welcome to my very own MDZS-specific iteration of the unparalleled @svsss-fanon-exposed and @tgcf-fanon-exposed. this blog is designed to find the differences between canon and fanon in the Mo Dao Zu Shi/Grandmaster of Demonic Cultivation fandom.

this blog is ENGLISH NOVEL CANON ONLY. although i may occasionally cite the drama or the donghua as the potential source for any misconceptions, the canons of these adaptations differ too much from the novel canon for my purposes (plus i haven't finished either one. whoops).

how this whole thing works:

send me an ask! is this thing you thought was canon actually fanon? is that fanon idea supported in the books? where? why? how?

i'll answer the ask with a rating, using SVFE's helpful rating system (explained below), and then go into detail. generally a post will include textual evidence supporting my rating, and possibly an analysis of what this means/where an idea came from.

i'll do my best not to introduce my own personal opinions or biases into the posts. if you have any textual evidence that you think disproves or otherwise contradicts one of my posts, i'm always happy to be corrected! HOWEVER. please do not argue with me or anyone else unnecessarily; this blog is not supposed to be a site for or source of discourse. i will block anyone who is repeatedly coming at me with bad faith. i'm doing this project for fun, and i want to keep it that way for everyone :)

posts will probably be sporadic so i don't burn myself out and lose interest. however, i want to try and answer as many questions as i can! submissions will open and close based on demand so i can stay on top of things.

some important things to keep in mind:

i'm not here to dunk on anyone's headcanons, and i am fully supportive of everyone's creative choices in the fandom!! (in fact i have many headcanons myself.) DO NOT harass anyone for their interpretations of the series. my purpose here is just to clarify whether certain ideas are textually supported, NOT to give an opinion on them.

i'm doing this blog for fun, so i'll be treating it as a casual project. i will only be using the official english translation of the novels, with the supplementary exception of the exiled rebels fanlation. i don't speak any chinese, so i will not be using the untranslated raws or any non-english fandom sources in my posts. although i'll be doing research as needed, i also will not be evaluating any headcanons purely based on chinese cultural norms, due to my unfamiliarity with them. if you are more familiar with any of these sources and have more information to add to a post, please let me know!

another thing to keep in mind: the official translation of the novels is not considered fully accurate to the original chinese. i am not immune to making mistakes, either. please take my posts with a grain of salt.

BECAUSE this is a casual project from someone whose only credentials are being completely obsessed with mo dao zu shi and knowing how to write an essay, anyone is welcome to make a blog that does this but. better. let me know if you start one and i'll point people your way lol.

finally: i will NOT be entertaining any character bashing in or on my blog. again, this is not a personal opinion-based blog, i'm looking at textual support, so honestly i don't think this disclaimer is necessary. but. just in case.

💥💥the rating system:💥💥

CANON: what it says on the tin! this fact is supported by the text. if you're trying to be as canon-compliant as possible, this rating is for you.

RUMOR: this fact is an in-text rumor. although this idea is mentioned in the novel, it's still not explicitly confirmed as canon. the characters themselves don't know if it's true or not!

FANON – SUPPORTED: not directly stated in canon, but it's a very likely interpretation, taking into account factors like cultural norms and occam's razor! this rating might be retroactively added to a post previously rated FANON – NEUTRAL, based on crowdsourced information about the raws or chinese culture.

FANON – NEUTRAL: it's not canon, but it's not NOT canon. the text neither confirms nor denies this interpretation, so it's up to you whether you want to consider it true to canon or not. the world is your oyster.

FANON – UNSUPPORTED: not directly stated in canon, but it's a very unlikely interpretation, taking into account factors like cultural norms and occam's razor. this rating might be retroactively added to a post previously rated FANON – NEUTRAL, based on crowdsourced information about the raws or chinese culture.

FANON – CONFLICTING: this idea directly contradicts something stated in the text. if you want to stay as canon-compliant as possible, this rating is not for you.

[gendertrickster]

could you elaborate on your take that Aradia's oppressive relationship to femininity means she cannot be textually transfem? i find that a bit of an odd take

like, obviously i think people can have whatever headcanons they want, and it's good to understand what is canon, what can be supported by canon, and what is pure fanon. i just don't see how there's any less textual evidence for Aradia as transfem than there is for, say, Vriska. am i missing something?

lemme use that last st8ment as a jumping-off to set the groundwork here. the core reason vriska is transfem is because femininity is something she must constantly perform and strive for to be recognized as a girl, whereas for aradia it is something put upon her by society that brings her only torment and oppression. the expectations for women of their respective castes is far different; for vriska, it is to be vengeful and powerful, but for aradia, it is to be compliant and subservient.

both of them hate conforming to their society's traditional gender roles for completely different reasons — vriska's conscience eats at her constantly for all the bad things she does and the person she really wants to be conflicts with the values of mindfang, the sole object of vriska's gender envy (next to tavros. not that she'd admit it). aradia hates her role in society because it is very deliberately forced upon her — it pushes her down and disarms her of her own agency and forces her to accept that there is nothing she can do without permission from someone or something else.

aradia's gender role in alternian society is very intentionally analogous to that of an asian (particularly japanese) woman: sexualized, exoticized, infantilized (a lot of which by equius), not allowed to speak for herself. this is key to understanding aradia's arc to me. as a maid of time, she is at the service of causality itself, not unlike her ancestor, tidying up myriad loose ends across the sgrub session and small parts of alternia's history such as the creation of doc scratch, across thousands of alternate selves, because if she didn't, the story would not be able to progress. she knows this. the story knows this. no one is happy about this.

her arc culminates in totality when she accepts her own death and dares to face the unknown, self-destructing, ascending to the god tiers and, for the first time in her life, feeling truly alive. freed from the shackles of her role as both parts burgundy-blood and woman, she makes her own choice to save her friends and then leave homestuck forever. not being in homestuck is its own reward, but all characters inherently fear death, because that is what they know and it is an instinct sburb requires. aradia, however, never could have feared death, for she had not been living until this moment. she becomes ultimately at peace with what is feared by all but her.

aradia's choice to leave behind what is known and "safe" in favor of pursuing the chance that she could ever reach a point where she is free to make her own decisions again is one of the most transgender actions in the entire story. aradia's abandonment of gender is synonymous with her rise to freedom.

[alfredsolos]

hey, you know how you did a review (basically) of colin’s character and kinda outlined or corrected any misinformation ppl make ab him (like that he’s Jon kent 2.0?) (idk how to explain- character study??? u just explained him rly well with good textual evidence)

anyways~

do you think u could do something like that for Maya Ducard? like, clear up any misconceptions ppl have ab her character and such? i want to write her but i don’t have the ability to read the comics/don’t rlly want to anyways.

Alright! Before going into a character analysis, let's talk about Maya's story. Who is Maya Ducard?

Maya Ducard is a vigilante/hero called Nobody. She is the second person to take up that mantle. The first Nobody aka Morgan Ducard aka Maya's father, was killed by Damian Wayne in Batman and Robin.

Maya finds the remains of her father's corpse beneath the sea and watches the clip of Damian killing her father. So to take revenge, she goes after Damian to kill him.

But during that time, Damian goes into a redemption trip where he tries to undo the damage he did when he was an assassin.

During on of those missions, Maya and Damian cross paths and she tries to kill him. But when she finds out that he was on a redemption trip, she decides to go with him and ensure that he is doing what he's supposed to. And she tells him that in the end she'd kill him.

Damian let's her tag along and they go on adventures together, growing closer and closer. And in the end, Maya forgives Damian.

Now, going back to the topic. Coming across Maya fics are harder because there are too few. So I don't really know how the fanon portrayes her.

I do know that most of the time she is portrayed as a supportive big sister, which is true but she is also so much more. So in this post I'll give out some facts about her and explain her character using canon panels.

****

1. Maya does not like the idea of innocents dying:

Even when she was trying to kill Damian, she interrups her plans to save the innocent people. This tells us that she indeed has a pure heart. Along with her potential to be a hero.

2. She knows how to get inside someone's skin:

During the times where they have a temporary ceasefire, Maya does not hold back from hurting Damian with her words and trying to get under his skin. This tells us that whoever her target is, she will do proper research on them and make sure to know them on a personal level. Which makes her dangerous.

She has a sharp tongue, so don't forget to apply this trait of hers on your fics!

3. Abilities?

Maya does not have any super powers. But she does have a super suit with numerous abilities. The most prominent ones being: Invisibility, sonic boom devices that are built into her hands, a device that distorts people's eyesight. She is also a very skilled fighter.

Another very important thing to note is that, her father wasn't the one who taught her how to fight:

She learned how to fight by herself, watching her dad from the shadows. Which indicates amazing strategic and martial ability. Not to mention how she tracked down Damian and manage to hold her own against him.

4. At first these two did not get along:

And by that I mean, they did not get along.

They did not fight due to the ceasefire. But the things they said to each other? Ouch.

5. Maya loves Goliath:

Before and after trying to kill Damian, Maya always loved Goliath. She even tried to take him away from Damian at one point.

Goliath also loves Maya very much, risking his life for her countless times.

6. Along with her hate for Damian, she was also jelaous of him:

One, he had a family that gave everything to him. Two; while her father never taught her anything, he took in Damian and taught him special moves and trained him. And due to this she naturally had a bit of envy of him.

7. Maya was still adament to kill Damian when they started to get along:

This didn't last that much, but in her mind it was some kind of divine justice.

8. Damian saved Maya from Deathstroke:

After Maya quit trying to become an assassin and killing Damian, Deathstroke came after her. But Damian basically pays her off and gives Slade 5 million dolars to stop trying to kill her. Surprisingly it works.

But Maya doesn't understand why he did this. She calls herself worthless and with this, we can get that she has very low self esteem and self-deprecating thoughts.

9. She is more laxed, compared to Damian:

As you can see, she does not shy away from resting unlike other assassins who do not stop until they complete their plans.

10. She has never killed anyone:

Even before or after Damian, she has 0 body count. She never killed or kills anyone in the future. This fact is the reason why Damian let Maya come with him after she tried to take him on. He knew that she wouldn't be able to do it.

11. Damian has a habit of calling her 'chica':

It's obvious that he does this to annoy her. But we can use this in the fanon as Damian annoying Maya by calling her chica

12. Damian gives Goliath to Maya:

After the redemption trip and Maya forgiving Damian, he tells her to take Golaith with him. Maya refuses and tells him that Goliath belongs to him. But Damian answers with:

Goliath ends up staying with her.

13. Damian shies away from asking Maya for help:

After the redemption arc, Maya settles in and is actually happy. Damian sees this and hesitates to ask for her help.

As you can see, this happens multiple times. Which is cute, to see Damian being shy. Maya could be the only person who makes Damian feel like that.

14. Maya gains a brother:

After forgiving Damian for killing her father, she tells him that he has gained a new sister. Which means a lot because this shows that blood isn't what matters, but love. Seeing Damian accept and love her, destroyes the 'blood son' argument.

15. Maya hates the al Ghul's:

She tells Talia that she hates all the al Ghuls, besides Damian. She also goes on to tell her that she is a horrible mother. And by that, she really goes all out.

16. She kidnaps Jon Kent:

We all know that Damian met Jon by kidnapping him. But the thing is, he wasn't alone! Maya also helped him to kidnap Jon.

****

Anyways, these were my intrepretation of Maya Ducard's character from her canon interactions. If anyone wants to add onto these, please feel free and thank you for the ask!

[19thcenturyfuck]

i think one of the funniest annoying tumblr fandom things is when a fandom collectively decides a character must be straight and cis despite textual evidence (if not outright textual confirmation) otherwise purely because they don't like that character. and they will post derisively about this character being straight or whatever and meanwhile the character is canonically not straight and you're just like man cmon. cmon man

[tanadrin]

john dehlin's interviews with david bokovoy on literary/textual criticism of the bible are super interesting in general, but i like how he talks about how you don't even need to know the first thing about the joseph smith papyri or the circumstances of its composition to know the book of abraham is a forgery--it's obvious from purely internal textual evidence alone that you cannot square it with any of the other books of the bible, even if you know comparatively little about the historical circumstances of the composition of the book of genesis, so focusing anti-apologetic attempts on the egyptological/archeological evidence is really a sideshow: historically interesting but not at all necessary.

in a later interview he also points out that purely from literary evidence alone we should conclude that there was probably a historical jesus of nazareth on whom the new testament figure is based--he points out that (just as now, really) the 1st century CE jewish expectation of a messiah-figure is so fundamentally contrary to the basic narrative elements of jesus's life that the nascent christian community is trying to rework into the biography of the messiah that it would make absolutely no sense for a purely invented figure. like, if you were going to invent someone (or if traditions were going to accrete around a purely fictitious character) to fulfill the basic characteristics of the messiah, you would think they would get basic assumptions about what the messiah is supposed to do right, and you wouldn't have to invent a completely new theology to make it work--that they did is indicative not of an invented figure, but of a real person for whom inconvenient biographical facts well-known to the community had to be renegotiated and reworked (and even then could only be renegotiated and reworked to a certain point). no one is going to invent a myth about someone who completely fails to meet every expectation of the messiah, as he puts it.

also--it strikes me that mormonism is really fuckin' verbose for a religion adding new scripture. like. okay, islam adds a whole new book (the qur'an), and it's not short, but at the same time it abrogates the hebrew bible and the new testament, so as a muslim you don't need to read those. mormonism adds not only a book longer than the new testament (~269k words to the NT's ~185k in English), the book of abraham, the book of moses, and doctrines and covenants, and the other stuff in the Pearl of Great Price, and it keeps the bible as part of the canon! that's too much damn scripture!

personally i think your religious scripture is more likely to come off as timeless if you keep it short. like, the ideal length of a holy book is the tao te ching (around 20,000 words in English). prophets and shit need to resist the urge to put every single petty grievance into sacred scrolls. save that shit for the commentary.

[paragonrobits]

so i unfortunately recently ran into a BUNCH of videos by a youtuber I really, really don’t like for various reasons; their vitrolic hatred of Steven Universe and refusal to think of the series in any way except a very binary moralistic view that doesn’t acknowledge the Gem’s different robot-like psychology, them constantly calling the creator of Steven Universe a Nazi despite Sugar being Jewish (and pointedly ignoring or dismissing all evidence to the contrary), having a long list of writing dos and don’t that mostly amount to ‘black and white morality is the only acceptable writing, everything must be Relatable or its bad writing, and everything i find icky is morally evil’ that i really don’t like for a lot of reasons, but that’s not the thing I feel motivated to mention right now

specifically I noticed some other videos they did on other series, and out of sheer morbid curiousity and a good helping of ‘i already hate these people, I must plumb the depths of my hatred for them and see if I am morally opposed to them on EVERY level’ and the off putting thing is that they came to some similar conclusions I have in other series, most especially in Mass Effect; that the genophage was wrong, and that the geth are more broadly sympathetic than the quarians (or at least the quarian admiralty board) and it was uncomfortable to realize that, but it made me think about WHY i felt that way and to analyze my knee-jerk responses, and I ultimately came to a few conclusions:

the first thing is that while I DO feel the genophage is ultimately wrong, and that the quarians wronged the geth, I still feel these youtubers addressed the problems in too simplistic a manner; among other things, I don’t think its right to imply the quarians deserve extinction for the actions of their ancestors or their authority figures, nor do I think its appropriate to completely depict the krogan EXCLUSIVELY as victims.

but something else dawned on me when i noticed they did a video on how the Dark Side of the Force needs to be treated more neutrally or given good points (for some reason??????) and that really stuck out to me because it felt so BIZARRE. in contrast to their constant moralizing and insistence on extremely simplisitc, puritanical notions of straightfoward moral resolutions, the Dark Side is interesting in this regard because there’s not really any way you CAN canonically regard it as neutral or having the ability to BE neutral. So why come to that conclusion?

part of it is that a LOT of people insist on viewing the Dark Side in ways like this. It’s hardly unique to a small bunch of Youtubers I’m starting to regard as, if not the starting point of the most toxic and vile elements of the puritanical part of fandom in recent times, at least excellent examples of its flawed mentality and methodology. It does stick out because these are people who often tend to express EVERYTHING in extremely simple, binary and black/white terms, and here they are insisting that the Power of Turbo-Fascism should be treated more equally. (I doubt they THINK of it as turbo-fascism, but the point still stands that the Dark Side has always been explicitly malicious and serving selfish, dominating ends, and the few times it has been fully explored, the writers at work outright SAID they took notes from fascist recruiting methods as a baseline for how the Sith would lure in potential recruits.)

Part of it, I think, is a certain contrarian element. Fair enough, I’m like that too; if you are just told a thing is pure evil without context or textual proof, its easy to just say ‘but what about if not?’. The Dark Side of the Force is very prone to people in general trying to see the positive aspects of it (despite those positive aspects already being present in the harmonious, life-affirming aspects of the Light Side, and that’s not even getting into the potential idea that there IS no real Dark Side, just selfishness and lack of self-control causing psychology and Force powers to meet in very bad and self-destructive ways). But it also does reflect a popular thing I’ve noticed in the parts of... not just fandom but broader attitudes in general, when you examine people who are resistant to self-examination or asking themselves if they are at fault, or being mindful of themselves.

Among people like that, you often see an attitude I might summarize as ‘Feeling = Good’. This is the people who tend to lean very hard towards romanticism and ideas like passion (by its own, and by itself) being a purely positive and benign, even transformative thing. Its a common social idea (even one present in the Jedi: “DON’T THINK. FEEL.”) and a tremendously romantic idea, often leading into the false assumption that if feeling is good, overthinking things is bad, or that feeling ANYTHING strongly is good, and if you’re not 1000 percent super passionate all the time or you’re NOT yelling your feelings the second you feel them, something is wrong with you.

Combine this with the double standard people like this tend to have, and the way they regard themselves as Wholesome and Pure (and thus, by their own definitions, as incapable of wanting bad things, or that their feelings might drive them to do something they don’t actually want to do), this tends to lead into a rabbit hole where the ultimate conclusion is that impulse is the same as thought and drive, and thus it is ideal to constantly be led BY those drives. Rule of impulse, you could say.

Now, consider the Dark Side which, at its core, is about the complete surrender of personal thought and will towards pure selfishness and putting your will upon the world. Canonically, this invariably results in domination, conquest and subjugation; that’s what the Dark Side IS. In contrast, the Light Side is about harmony with the greater world, in a way that resembles something of a very vague and Westernized take on Taoism.

So I think what you might be seeing here is how you get people going down a rabbit whole of moral purity that leads to Randian levels of self-perpetuating false conclusions, combined with an insistence on passions only ever being a good thing (to the extent of implicitly regarding self control, or the DESIRE to have self control, as a sign of being a bad person because a Good Person would not have those feelings) coming to a trainwreck in a legitimately funny way given that its interacting with a fandom concept that I, again, can call the Power of Turbo-Fascism because that’s what it narratively IS.

At worst, its rather revealing; at best, its a stunning lack of self awareness.

[theheirofthesharingan]

Every time I hope Sasuke fans won't stoop any lower in their hate by inventing lies about Itachi and giving out uninformed, terrible takes, I'm proven wrong. Some, to feed their hate boner for Itachi, don't shy away from creating myths just so they can go "Look, evil Itachi."

Simple math will tell you the 50000000000 or whatever numbers you've used is pure, unadulterated bullshit. Maybe look at Manga canon instead of Reddit or Quora or TikTok for factual information on Itachi? Kishimoto wrote him, not the fic writers who use these stats for angst effect in their stories.

In simple words, there is no textual evidence to any of your claims. Do the math and you'll know. If not, then do let me know, because I would, more than happily, do it for you. I'm tired right now, and don't want to waste my time on this more than necessary. I'm also hoping Itachi novels isn't your answer to this, because come on.

Now, onto, How would Mikoto and Fugaku react?

They would be ashamed of themselves, if they have any sanity and conscience in them left at all. It was their decisions, their neglect that led to the massacre. Danzo and Hiruzen are the secondary characters in deciding whether massacre happens or not, or whether Itachi is the one to do it. Fugaku allowing him to join Anbu, not supporting him through his worst times, and Mikoto as usual being a neglectful mother to a traumatized child, plays the bigger role in every thing Itachi does.

Fugaku set the foundation of Itachi's character in his formative years, but by using and neglecting him. The man failed to be a healthy father figure to his own child. Just because Mikoto and Fugaku were better parents to Sasuke doesn't make them the parents of the year. They were both terrible parents to Itachi.

They would certainly not approve of Itachi torturing Sasuke, but they would know it was their own failures that Itachi had to take measures he did so Sasuke doesn't fall in the hands of the likes of Danzo.

Unlike his fans, Sasuke does see Itachi's side of the story, and although he doesn't approve of it (and even questions it too), he sees the picture as it is meant to be seen. Mikoto and Fugaku (unlike their sympathisers) would manage to see too that Itachi hated himself enough to punish himself for years.

No one would hate Itachi for everything more than Itachi would hate himself.

I desperately want to know how Fugaku and Mikoto would have reacted to how Sasuke was treated after the massacre. Same with Shisui actually.

I wonder if they would have accepted death the same way or instead would have fought Itachi had they know the fate waiting for Sasuke.

Neither fugaku or mikoto fought itachi as one they couldn’t bring themselves to harm their child. But secondly because as their dying wish, itachi promised he would look after Sasuke. And what did he go and do? Torture this boy beyond comprehension. He never needed to go that far. Sasuke witnessed the Uchiha massacre at the hands of the brother he loved more than anyone over 500,000 times. At the age of seven… he is torn away from everything he loves because of his brother, I think that’s enough to make someone hate another. The extra step with the tsukuyomi really was not necessary. And twice?! Uh huh… it shouldn’t be surprising itachi wouldn’t respect the dying wish of his mother and father considering that atrocities he committed against them already. But it’s still heartbreaking. Idk if I were Mikoto or Fugaku I’d be pissed. And I wonder what Shisui would think. Not only for itachi to kill the whole clan, but then his future crimes too against both Sasuke and as a criminal. Shisui is slightly more complicated as he didn’t support the coup and wanted to protect Konoha like Itachi. But Itachi took it so much further.

The Uchiha clan are the clan of love. They do everything for their family. For itachi to do this is a complete disregard for their culture and everything they stand for and feel. Idk if I were an Uchiha, I’d be appalled.

Just had some thoughts about this and how Itachi completely disregarded his parents’ sacrifice

[jiangwanyinscatmom]

That JC post was so freaking hilarious. Thank you OP for making me laugh at the sheer absurdity and stupidity that were those words.

How entitled do you have to be to suggest that people use tags primarily because apparently our "fanon" metas and discussions aren't true to his character. The way I see it is (copying this from hamliet - aka kate)

Can you back your interpretation up with specific textual evidence that isn’t just “I had a feeling while watching/reading it?”

Does your claim rest upon another claim that is not provable? If yes, then you’ve got a problem.

Does that textual evidence take context and potential counterarguments into account? You have to address this. I don't personally understand why JC's role as an antagonist instills this much rage. Like babe, look underneath the underneath. There's a reason why canon jc is a tag and that's because somehow this dude's main characterization and arc gets the fanon erasure treatment everytime without fail. If you like that, go ahead but let's not act as if fanon JC was how MXTX wrote him nor as if canon JC was written incorrectly.

I'm just baffled at how angry they are over a tag and it not being catered to their preferences, as they had already whined about when it was made. Just block the tag, it's exactly what I do with ships I dislike and if it's not tagged despite the content, I block the user.

Fandom curation for your own sake DOES take some thought on your part as well, it's not my prerogative if how I tag about a fictional guy upsets a stranger. If you don't like how I speak about the blorbo, block, because I'm not changing the way I think of him for the sake of "you discussing him like this hurts my feelings".

I like him as he is as an antagonist, no that doesn't mean I think he's pure evil. But he's not some caricature to use to be disrespectful to the author's intentions for what he is meant to convey, glorifying a rather toxic relationship is something we should have gotten over when it came to Bella and Edward back in 2010. If emotional appeal is all you have, I don't care honestly, because the bias is clearly aimed to your own comfort that can be solved with blocking.

[nogoodsheepstealing-greatgrandma]

What gets me is the selectivity of the "it didn't happen in the book" argument. Ok then, Alicent isn't a child bride in the book, Viserys didn't cut open his wife and he didn't marry his daughter's best friend.

Like, Alicent (18) is still younger than Viserys (29), which is icky but by Westerosi standards that's normal. And it makes a great deal of difference than Rhaenyra is only 9. The age gap between Alicent and Viserys (11 years) is the same as the age gap between Alicent and Rhaenyra*. Show Viserys looks worse than Book Viserys by marrying someone his daughter's age. It's a lot more gross and hypocritical when he's treating Rhaenyra like a child while making Alicent his wife.

You could therefore make the same character assassination claims with regards to Viserys that Green supporters make for Aegon. Yet I've seen people on this site furious at the show for 'making Aegon a rapist' while simultaneously furious at any suggestion of sympathy for Viserys, at anyone forgetting what Viserys did to Alicent and Aemma.

If you want to judge Viserys purely by his actions in the show, then you have to apply that same standard to Aegon. If you want to appeal to the books and insist that Aegon is not a rapist, then you have to apply that same standard to the other characters.

And even then, there is textual evidence to back up Aegon being a rapist. The source that says Aegon raped a 12-year-old is the same source that identifies Rhaenyra as the one to attempt to seduce Criston Cole (rather than the other way around). If there is an element of truth in the latter (which the show depicts), then its possible there can be an element of truth in the former.

*For reference, the book age gap between Rhaenyra and Criston Cole is 15 years - he is 22 years old when he becomes the sworn shield to a 7 year old Rhaenyra. This pretty crucial aspect of their relationship is dropped in the show, making Criston look better. It is odd that the show narrows the age gap between Criston and Rhaenyra, making him no longer a predator, while changing the dynamic between Alicent and Viserys so that she is literally his daughter's age.

To be clear, an 18 year old Alicent can be just as much a victim of marital rape and wombification as show Alicent. But again, it is so so much worse when she is the same age as her husband's daughter. And again, while Viserys is coming across as worse in the show, Criston is coming across as a lot more sympathetic (to the point that viewers are now debating whether HE was the victim of dubious consent, rather than identifying him as just as predatory as Daemon).

Meanwhile Aemond goes from bully to bullied, and Aegon has become a tortured sad boy with daddy issues. So despite the cries from Team Green of character assassinations, I'd say the show has their faves coming out pretty much ahead, considering book canon.

I want to know why everyone treats Aegon as if he’s a little boy with depression who has daddy and mommy issues. Like he’s a grown man that literally r*pes woman, and goes to child fighting pits.

“It didn’t happen in the book!!!!” (even thought it’s mentioned he harassed servants, but I digress cause different takes from different people.) Great, I’m talking about the show where it is very clear what he does. He r*pes servants, r*pes Helaena, and has his own children in a fighting rink. He’s a terrible fucking person.

“But… but… Daemon!!!!” He’s a piece of shit too. I acknowledge that. Now what?

I don’t care if you’re team green, but i constantly see people who just ignore that Aegon is a vile piece of human trash. Y’all see a white man with sad eyes/a nice jaw line and think he’s just a baby when he literally r*pes his own sister.

[cto10121]

R&J Clown Takes Round ♾ + Part 10

In which I got a truly deranged Instagram reel from the depths of the algorithm, ranting about how R&J are totes not a love story. Thus rampant clownage ensued. And so: Once more unto the breach, my good friends.

BFFs With Shakespeare

Clown OP knows this because they have drinks every Sunday with Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, John Fletcher, and all of dem cats down at the Dolphin. It’s a great hub. Clown OP is the one who has to hold Jonson back when Shakespeare starts roasting him.

And true, Will is always bemoaning about teen girls chasing after boys constantly—that’s why he wrote so many happy romantic comedies about teen girls doing just that and getting their heart’s desire. He just hated it that much.

Clown OP 2 is also good friends with Will, and heard this straight from his lips. It was a typical evening at the Dolphin in 1594 and Shakespeare was in a rant about Arthur Brooke’s narrative poem about R&J and how his canon sucks and that actually, R&J are truly in love and their end was truly tragic and he WILL PROVE IT. Only Clown OP 2 misheard “tragic” for “basic” and thought Shakespeare was casting shade about his own adaptation. Clown OP 1 also didn’t hear it, as they were too busy trying to prevent Ben Jonson from dueling Fletcher.

Romeo the Death Eater

Romeo forced Tybalt to seek him out and try to duel him, he forced Mercutio duel Tybalt, and of course he forced Juliet to take her life from beyond the grave. Everything is Romeo’s fault because it certainly isn’t Tybalt’s. They’ve stopped teaching cause and effect relationships in school, haven’t they?

Creepy Italian Groomer is back! I was starting to miss thee. It’s been awhile. How’s it been? Still intellectually bankrupt, I see. No, I will not lend thee money.

Let me help you out, OP. “Shall I hear more or shall I speak of this?” “Shall I move forward when my heart is here?” “I am too bold; ‘tis not to me she speaks.” Textual evidence for his ADHD, clearly.

Juliet tells some equivocating half-truths and suddenly she is a criminal mastermind. As for the lost puppy, I dare you to tell Juliet that to her face. Homegirl compares Romeo to a very different and sexy animal altogether.

Cool fanfic, bruh. Really liked your prostitute OC. That scene where she breaks up with Romeo in the afternoon was heartbreaking.

Both Sides!1!!1!1

A lot of word vomit here. But okay, OP. I’ll bite and take you seriously.

Is Shakespeare trying to make a point about the stupidity of both sides, the youths and the older generations? Is the satire truly equal on both sides?

Well, no. While there is no character that is truly without flaws (because this is Shakespeare, after all) the youths definitely get a way more sympathetic edge from the narrative in a way that their parents don’t. R&J are the beating and living heart of this play, dynamic and intricately developed, Mercutio is downright luminous with the right actor, Benvolio is just straight up too good for this world, and even Tybalt gets some baller lines and fiery speeches—he’s so much fun to play, and plus, his death actually has weight in the narrative.

The parents…not so much. While the Friar and even the Nurse have moments of adult wisdom, the Capulets are pure dysfunction. The Montague parents are much nicer but just simply…there. When the Capulets mourn Juliet, it’s written as a cacophony, almost garishly insincere in its repetition. I don’t think that’s an adequate parallel with R&J’s moments of despair. Even there the lovers are eloquent, even rhetorical: Of course I’m upset because of X and Y!!! There is rationale even if their emotions are too much. I think it’s clear which side got the most satire.

And that’s why Shakespeare wrote R&J falling in love with each other when they don’t even know each other’s names and already be at 110% in their love (Juliet: “If he be marrièd / My grave is like to be my wedding bed”). To illustrate this exact point.

The Quiet Part

Shh, OP! You’re not supposed to say the quiet part aloud. Number one rule of clownery and you broke it.