#not because they are bad people but because it’s irresponsible to just assume they know what’s going on

[bafflegab-z]

I really gotta start advocating for myself in regards to accesible events huh

[astrow1zar6]

Astro Observations-19

I notice Earth suns tend to have a very bullying type of humor. Very harsh dry humor that’s borderline offensive is their style. Sometimes it’s hard to know if they’re joking or serious especially Capricorn’s 😭

Aries men are surprisingly not as hot headed as people would expect. It actually takes a lot before they really yell at you. Usually only if u insult something they’re passionate in. The women are a lot more hot headed & easily set off imo

Mercury Rx people usually struggle with speech or reading problems. I notice it can result in having a stutter or a lisp, dyslexia or just very bad social anxiety. In extreme cases I’ve seen selective mutism. I also notice they have a very intense relationship with books & reading, it’s either they absolutely love reading or it’s really challenging for them in some way. A lot started off in their earlier years finding reading challenging then ended up loving reading as they grew. It’s like a mental exercise for them.

Saturn RX people always make bad choices lol. They always choose the path that will lead to the most hardship just for the fun of it or the excitement (which it’s normally not fun for too long) they usually grew up having a hard time with authority. Could of had very authoritative parents that were too hard on them which caused them to rebel. In this lifetime they are here to learn the value of HARD-work because in past lives these people were usually really irresponsible & put fun and pleasure over building their futures. These people will face so much disappointment until they surrender their rebel lifestyle. Deep down they do want to mature & be better but many believe they aren’t good enough. Once they reach this maturity however their life will do a 360.

Venus in the 1st house people can act very unpleasant when they are getting ignored or the attention isn’t fully on them. They value people liking them & fitting in so when they feel like they aren’t vibing with anyone they go into this deep self pity downer attitude. Their self esteem and happiness is determined by how many people accept them.

Venus in the 3rd house people have relationships that look more like friendships. Their partnerships are more playful & light then deep and intense. They usually end up dating their best friend. Could lack in the physical realm however in some cases.

Venus in the 7th house people usually have a lot of crushes. Most of them however never turn into anything deeper. It’s surprisingly hard for these people to fall in love. They can also lead a lot of people on because of their multiple crushes. Not easy to keep these people attention.

Moon in Caps are really afraid of rejection. They will act they hate you even if they’re in love with you to avoid showing their vulnerable side. Their coldness can ruin a lot of relationships that they actually really wanted.

Mercury in Pisces people can never stay on topic while speaking 😂 they have this habit of going off topic then completing forgetting why they were even telling the story in the first place. They also disassociate like a mf. They can be staring dead in your eyes for hours and not hear a word you’re saying lol.

If you try to argue with a Mars in the 3rd house you will never win. These people are natural born lawyers. They come with all the receipts 👀

Cancer placements tend to have really round faces. Like the moon.

Pisces placements are really wise and really childish at the same time. They all have this naive childish aura around them where you assume they don’t understand much but then when you really get to know them they will talk to you like your listening to an Alan Watts lecture 😂

Mercury in the 12th house I believe is the most introverted mercury placement. Even with a more extroverted mercury sign there’s still this deep reserve to them. These are usually those kids in class that you never heard speak once then they finally speak u think “holy shit they do know how to talk” lol. I notice they choose to stay quiet because people ignore them anyways. Like people will ask them to be more open and talk more & when they actually try they are usually brushed off.. it’s really not fair, and they know this all too well.

Aquarius Venus 🤝 having their friends catch feelings for them

Uranus/Venus aspects are usually apart of the LGBTQ community.

[fallen-daughter]

Aroallos are not treated the same as alloaces or aroaces.

We are seen in a worse light than alloaces and aroaces because sexual attraction with no romance is seen as "morally incorrect" and "sinful" no matter how you go about it.

Even in queer and aspec circles we are treated poorly.

Many people, queer or otherwise, see sex outside of a relationship as bad, especially if you are someone who does not intend on settling down at any point in your life.

Being aro is frustrating enough when people either don't know you exist or refuse to believe your lack of romantic attraction is anything but a mental illness, a choice made because of self-esteem issues, a phase, or a personal failing. Adding sexual attraction to a lack of romantic attraction makes things a million times more difficult because then people assume you're a pervert, homewrecker, or are sexually violent/irresponsible in some way.

Even in the modern day when sex before/without marriage and FWBs are gradually becoming more acceptable, most people assume those who have sex also want to settle down at some point. And when you tell them you don't, you are perceived as a pervert.

You end up having to reassure people you're "normal" about sex. You have to explain in detail why you're safe, even if you've shown no signs of sexuality before then.

To be transparent, I'm not saying alloaces and aroaces have no problems at all or that their problems are less important than those of aroallos. And I'm not saying this to be divisive or cause any infighting. I'm saying this because aros in general often get ignored. We're often overlooked because we're not considered an "important" part of the queer community, and our identity is seen as something trivial. And a lot of times, for aroallos, we are intentionally excluded from discussions about queerness or aspecness because we're considered "taboo."

I just think we need to start having discussions within the aspec community about the amount of stigma around being aromantic but not asexual. We need to address the alloarophobia within queer and aspec circles before it gets any worse.

[blossomthepinkbunny]

Talking about Adam and the villians of HB

Adam is such a dissapointing villain for Hazbin Hotel that absolutely doesn't make use of the great opportunities they had for the bad guy of this project. Like, what is Adam? A sexual, irrational, rockstar asshole who kills demons for fun and is shown to be completely idiotic and unable to make any good point for his actions. And that sucks.

Atleast to me, them making Adam an irredeemable asshole type just seems like the show acknowledging that they can't take any actual feedback on Charlies idea. He is a strawman who never really gets to be anything else until his final moments, when they want you to care about his fight. The show doesn't want you to actually think critical about what Charlie has planned it just wants you to think she is right, by making you hate Adam, by making his side actively carry out genocide. The fact that a show all about revealing that people have layers and presenting seemingly morally grey areas in them has a villian who is completely one note and just evil and irrational because the show needs him to be is not great.

There are actual things that can be criticized about the Hotel and the idea of redeeming sinners, but Adam can't call any of these out because then Charlie would have to defend herself, which she can't do and then you would realize that the writers couldn't think of arguments for why she is right. And then Charlie would come off as not as great as they want you to think she is.

What if he had called out the fact that genuinely no demon seems to give a shit about being a better person. We don't get a definitive time for how long Charlie has been working on the Hotel but we can assume that it has been atleast a little longer. We see her advertise her idea on the news in the pilot and the Hotel makes an advertisement in the first episode, so we know that it's pretty open information that a place where demons can redeem themselves exist. Yet in the entirety of the pilot, season one and however much time lays between the two, only two sinners came to the hotel to change (im not counting staff members because they are there to work, not to be redeemed).

Angel Dust and Sir Pentious are the only ones who came to stay, which either means that just no other sinner cares to be better or that Charlie is not taken seriously and that her hotel is viewed as stupid in concept alone. And you have to remember that even these two didn't initially join because they genuinely wanted to change.

Angel just decided to stay because it was a cheap place to live where he wouldn't have to see Val. And while Pentious does decide he wants to be better, we don't know if he would have even done that, had it not been for the agreement he made with Vox (which made him come to the hotel with bad intentions in the first place).

Why doesn't Adam get to point out that sending Sinners to heaven might be a bad idea when there are probably people that they hurt or may have even killed up there. Like, Angel Dust was in the Mafia and you can assume that he has quite the killcount and it's very possible that some of his victims are in heaven. That goes for every other demon too, they're down there for a reason. And while sometimes that reason might be something stupid or irrelevant, just giving every demon the benefit of the doubt and a chance to get to heaven (in theory) seems pretty irresponsible.

That is also completely ignoring the fact that Charlie's method has no proof of even working. Seemingly in the entirety of hell existing no sinner has ever redeemed themselves and went to heaven until Sir Pentious, which was mostly an accident as well.

I'm not saying Adam had to be likeable or relatable, but it's pretty obvious that they made him so hateable just because. He can't just be an obnoxious, sexist asshole because that's not blatantly evil enough apparently. He also has to commit genocide for no reason other than that he enjoys it. Again, im not saying his genocide should be excusable, but he should have a reason that isn't presented as him just doing it for fun because hes a jackass (he should have a reason that would make what he is doing okay in his own eyes where the viewer could understand how he views the world without having to agree necessarily).

Writing evil characters who are purely bad because they just are can work. But in my opinion that shouldn't be the main villian, especially not in a show where the central idea is supposed to be discussing morality and moral greyness.

Cioccolata from Jjba is a villian where this works in my opinion. He is just evil and Araki really plays that up. He isn't just a crazy doctor type who violently experiments on people for fun, his backstory also shows that he has been doing this since he was 14 and started with driving elders to suicide. And also he films everything he does because he just likes watching people suffer. Cioccolata really is just irredeemably crazy and sadistic but it works for him because he is just a side antagonist and therefore doesn't have the burden of playing as a direct counter to our main protagonist and because for all his immoral actions he still has philosophy behind that. A fucked up philosophy but an understandable (not excusable) one nonetheless. He explaines that in his eyes people can only experience true happiness from two situations. Either when your own despair is replaced with hope, or when one watches other people fall into despair themselves. In his eyes, the more people he watches die, the more he understands the human race and the stronger he gets, which leads into another aspect of his philosophy, which is that the strong have have the right and responsibility to rule over the weak. That is why I think he works.

We actually get some insight into Adams deeper character motivation in his last moments. When he gets upset that the demons aren't just falling at his feet, worshipping him, even though he is the original man all life came from. And that would be a good idea to expand on, that Adam has this intense sense of entitlement that leads him to despise the demons because he doesn't have power over them, when he feels like he should. And because a crowd of people that don't worship him, feels threatening to him, he would want them gone as to not possibly risk his position of power with their ideas.

That could be the reason for why he despises Charlie, because she is a demon who makes her own plans to save her people, which would mean they could start to follow her and work with her, rather than idolizing him. Something like that would work so well for his character and would fit this saviour attitude that some religious people have when "helping" atheists by recommending that they should be religious to make all their problems dissapear or something (no shade to people who genuinely find peace and safety in their religion I think that's actually great but it's not a solution for everybody). The last moments he has give great insight into what his character could've been, had they focused on this, rather than always just having him say how much he enjoys killing demons for no reason.

And in the song he has he also nearly approaches giving another possible reason for his actions (that being that he just doesn't care because demons already had their chance to be good, didn't choose that and now don't deserve a second chance), but that is also never expanded on and is pretty much ignored throughout the season.

Also I find it interesting that Adam has to be completely and irredeemably evil, hated by everyone, while Lucifer gets away with just letting the people he is supposed to rule die like it's nothing. Lucifer didn't to anything to stop the exterminations, he didn't contact his daughter in quite some time and actively mocks her idea when first meeting her after these months of not giving a shit for her or what she does (her idea that is supposed to save his people from literal death btw).

We see him easily finish Adam off in the finale which begs the question for why he just never cared to do anything before. But it's fine because he's just so silly and goofy and actually cares a lot for Charlie say's the show. That is why he gets to be redeemed in the same episode he appeared in for the first time and no one is allowed to question him because then you're just not nice and understanding.

Lucifer didn't have to like sinners. I think his approach of basically leaving the sinners to their own devices is pretty interesting. But HH wants you to hate Adam and like Lucifer without acknowledging that people who just watch bad stuff being done without doing anything about it are also shitty. And for Lucifer it seems extra shitty because we see he can literally just defeat Adam and he just didn't do anything for this whole time.

Helluva Boss has this problem too where it picks characters it wants you to like and if you don't like them then you're just wrong. And therefore no villian gets to call these characters out without being shown to be either stupid, irrational or mean.

Striker was genuinely interesting and cool when he first appeared. He was an antagonist who had understandable goals that tied in well with the trajectory of the story. The classism in hell's society is a pretty relevant theme for HB. We see that Blitzø has to sleep with Stolas to be able to even do his job and earn a living, we see Imps just being tossed around and abused and hear Stolas say stuff like "impish little plaything" to Blitzø. Striker wanting to take the demons of high rank down to make hell better for the Imps by ending classism made sense and was an interesting take to see. Especially since at that point the show didn't insist on Stolas being this misunderstood good guy who just cares soo much for Blitzø, there was a sense of suspense maybe to watch wether or not Blitzø will go along with Striker or if this interaction might influence how he views his clearly predatory "relationship" with Stolas.

But all of that got thrown out the window because in s2 we just can't have people criticise Stolas, since actually acknowledging the fact that he benefited and actively made use of hells classist system would mean that we wouldn't see him as a poor confused bean anymore and that one might actually think of some of the pretty bad implications the Stolitz relationship has. So now Striker is a completely obvious, self obsessed bad guy who loves himself so much that he monologues about how great he feels when torturing Stolas instead of just killing him while they also gave him a weird gimmick where he doesn't like it when someone makes a sexual remark and gets so upset that he drags out Stolas' killing and gets defeated by Millie and Moxxie because of it (the same guy was established as a great assassin in another episode).

They also removed all the backbone to his ideology. He still talks about Stolas diminishing Imps in "Western Engery" but it lacks any point because they have gone so far with woobifying Stolas that he is presented as sympathetic and Striker as bigoted. Striker also acts like he can't kill Stolas because Stella called off the assassination on him. I get him being upset that he won't get his money for the kill but he still has very clear reasons for why he would want Stolas dead regardless (atleast he had when he was still a cool character). It's not like suddenly not being hired anymore would make a big change for him.

Killing Stolas could have consequences because Stolas is royalty, but these consequences always existed for him even while Stella was requesting the assassination. Stella would obviously not want others to know that she is reponsible for Stolas dying (then again we don't know if that would even matter since demons generally don't care about killing others until it's plot relevant) and the point of an assassin is that people are killed in a way that can't be tracked back to someone, so Striker should also not face issues, especially since he is apparently a really good and threatening assassin.

Striker was interesting until the show decided it liked Stolas too much for people to call him out and be presented as reasonable. Stella was turned into just an abusive, whiny and stupid bitch who just hates Stolas and wants his money instead of acknowledging that she pretty much has the same backstory as Stolas, who we are constantly told to feel bad for because of his childhood (arranged marriage, forced to have a child and a set-up relationship neither of them wanted).

Verosika is really not relevant but usually also falls into the "bitchy and just rude" category because she doesn't like Blitzø (it's not as bad for her as it is with Stella but still). Asmodeus and Fizzarolli where really mean and exposed and embarrassed Stolas and Blitzø publicly. But the next time we see Asmodeus interact with Stolas he is just chill with him? Why? Blitzøs and Fizzarollis relationship was atleast handled in a way and we see him act rude towards Blitzø until they make up. But it still followes the theme of people who dislike Stolas and Blitzø either changing their mind or just being shown to be horrible to make their opinion seem invalid (also notice how these male characters in the story get to be forgiven for how they acted and show different sides to their character while the women are reduced to being bitchy).

Barbie Wire was also handled soo bad. She only appears in the last few minutes of her début episode and never gets to talk about specifically why she doesn't want to have contact with Blitzø in the first place. The focus is mostly on how hurt he is by the fact his Sister wants nothing to do with him, even after he worked soo hard to find her and just wanted to make things right with her soo bad. They also basically made her a groomer which just doesn't help her come off as reasonable at all.

For a show that wants it's main characters to do bad stuff and have to deal with being called out for that it surely doesn't like people actually calling them out.

The double standards applied to the villians as opposed to the "good guys" are also just amazing. Like Millie and Moxxie can complain about Chaz being a bad partner in hindsight, but when Verosika talks about Blitzø being selfish in their relationship it's all about how he feels. Loona literally throwing stuff at Blitzø, hurting him just because he dared to carefully point out a true fact about her behaviour is played for laughs, but Stella abusing Stolas is super duper evil and we all hate her now (not saying it isn't bad but the show shouldn't pick and choose who is funny when abusive and who is evil when abusive). The I.M.P taking out random people because they were paid to is fine, but Striker attacking Stolas after being hired is bad just because he also happens to have a (understandable) motiv for why he would want to do it regardless of his job and because Stolas just so happens to be a main character. Blitzø and Loona commenting on Moxxies weight is funny, but when Mammon remarks that Fizzarolli gained a few pounds he is just bad.

That's just my opinion on some of the antagonists in HH and HB. Mammon is pretty much the only villian I really care for in both shows (also Stella and Striker before they got ruined). I mainly think antagonist are either really underused (Vox, Velvette, Verosika) or were just incredibly mishandled (Adam, Striker, Stella). Part of this post was just an excuse to talk about Jjba tho, which I always love.

[formula-wind]

choose your agent! — valorant mains of furin high first years

※ headcanons for wind breaker characters as valorant players ft. sakura haruka, nirei akihiko, suo hayato, & sugishita kyotaro

Sakura Haruka — instalock duelist

Like with gang fights, he definitely had his fair share of experiences with cocky duelists so it’s no surprise he tries to take the main damage-dealer role first in his team when he queues for a game.

Reyna would be the first one Haruka tries to pick because of the agent’s self-sustaining nature. No need to rely on teammates for entry support or heals—relating well with his independent character.

I mean, Reyna’s blind wont affect his teammates so there’s no reason for them to yell at him for bad blind timings or wasting heals so less problems!

Though not that he would admit this, but he also thinks she’s the most useful agent for helping the team out.

No one is an initiator? Haruka entries site for the team with a blind, killing anyone there who stops his team from getting in.

No one is a sentinel? Haruka stays behind to guard their backs trying to stay alive for as long as possible to protect the spike (when attacking) or site (when defending).

No one is a controller? Well, he can’t really do much with Reyna’s abilities but he does hunt down enemies when he has ultimate available to reduce the team’s worries.

Definitely sets a good example for how Reyna mains should be.

He also just hates being in a team with Reyna players who talk shit more than get kills. Who doesn’t though?

Because of this, he does understand that instalocking Reyna would get his teammates assuming he’s one of the bad players but he couldn’t care less when they express their annoyance.

Haruka can and will prove them wrong, after all.

However, in extremely rare cases where people instalock duelists before him, he either dodges (95% of the time since he just wont be able to stand the possibility of egoistical teammates) or picks Chamber.

Why? He can stay behind guarding flank or site strongly as his “dumbass teammates” charge the enemies.

With his shooting skills, he can really makes the most out of Chamber’s abilities.

Also because of chamber’s pistol and rifle ultimate, he’s also able to buy a gun for a teammate if needed. Again, definitely not something he would admit, but if pointed out, best believe he’s going to scream in voice chat about how irresponsible his team is with credits.

Akihiko Nirei — sentinel or controller strategist

We all know how proactive he is with gathering information about guys he finds cool so I am pretty sure that when he gets really into Valorant he has a notebook full of strategy plans, setups, and lineups from his research and actual game experiences.

His analytical skills and game-knowledge would definitely make him the best supporting member of the team.

Nirei would be that person that waits for everyone to pick their agent before picking his to avoid complaints and to work with the team dynamic.

If a sentinel is needed, fits well with the team and the map; he would most likely select Killjoy.

He probably mastered a lot of swarm + alarm bot setups. Though, he does like using the same setups twice or more instead of switching it up if it works against the enemy.

Probably does it because he thinks the enemy wouldn’t expect such plans to be executed again (not really true most of the time).

Good thing about Nirei is he knows what he’s capable and not capable of; he understands his weaknesses so he plays it safe to not become a burden to his teammates.

Enemies call him a rat for being so skilled with his utility usage, and he takes it as a compliment with pride.

Loves playing post-plant lineups! He practices a lot in custom before each ranked game.

However, if his team needs a controller to block out sections of a site to secure entries, he’s playing Astra.

Now, Astra is probably one of the toughest agents to master since it needs good map awareness skills and team coordination so Nirei only picks her if he knows his team can give good comms and support (like if he would be playing with the other bofurin members).

He would definitely take pride in assisting his teammates with getting kills by using concuss (nova pulse) and pulling enemies (gravity well).

May get too focused with getting his abilities set up and activated right so he would need someone to watch his back (he has been trolled and stabbed multiple times, which sometimes led to really funny games).

Truly the teammate with the braincells we all need (and aspire to be).

Suo Hayato — duelist-like sentinel or full-on duelist

He is a Sage main. 100%. No doubt.

Oh but Hayato's not your stereotypical bottom frag “team before me” Sage main.

He’s the type that would carry the whole team—some would even say he’s one of those “selfish” Sage players.

Why she’s his first pick? Simple: fun walls.

He doesn’t really like walling off the spike since it doesn't provide good entertainment he knows his walls can be used for better uses.

He loves tormenting the enemy with crazy Sage wall placements, getting kills without the enemy knowing where they’re getting shot at brings him so much joy—it’s almost sadistic.

You think a wall is misplaced so bad it lets you enter the site easier? Wrong. Hayato's behind you getting your team one by one.

Sometimes he drags it out, watching the enemy team get past him when they don’t check their corners and follows them to the site—and if they’re attacking—he does the little ninja defuse trick; defusing the spike as soon as the other team has planted it.

With his healing orbs, he is still very supportive of his team and usually heals them first instead of himself, not really minding if they still die first after getting healed. He’s pretty confident with his shooting skills so he survives well without needing additional health stats.

He plays at a distance so even on low health he is able to get frags.

His slow orbs are also mainly there for its regular use of keeping enemies at bay, but also torment his team members if they’re getting on his nerves—which doesn’t happen often.

The reviving ultimate? If his team keeps asking to be revived best believe he’s only using it to use the revived bodies as a shield or revives them in the most inconvenient moment.

When given the chance to be a duelist, he is definitely picking Jett.

You really can’t convince me otherwise cause her swift play style suits well with Hayato's character.

Those updraft knife trick shots on tiktok? He does them at least once a game to bring down the enemy’s mental.

Would probably be like a Tenz with Jett’s ultimate. He would save the other abilities if he knows he has or is getting his ultimate soon to do those crazy killer dash moves.

This is pretty much self-explanatory so I don’t know what else to say. Hayato is graceful; Jett lets him prove it in game.

Sugishita Kyotaro — hunting-focused initiator

Probably not the most active player in Bofurin but when he does play, he’s playing Fade.

Is probably only ever playing fade because it fits the most with him though.

Short explanation: their auras match well; scary and will be out to torment you.

Long explanation: if he’s playing with Umemiya, he’s probably using Fade to provide support and keep the enemy as far from him as possible.

Since he also doesn’t talk much, Fade uncovering the location of enemies helps him be useful for his team without needing much interaction. I mean, the agent literally can direct you to enemies with the ultimate ability so what else is there to point out?

I also see him as a very proactive corner-checker so Fade’s haunt and prowler is really handy for him. No corner of the site is left unchecked with Kyotaro around!

However, I can’t really picture him using seize that much for capturing enemies so I think he doesn’t really purchase it. If they’re out in the open, he likes killing them head-on so he doesn’t see much value to the said skill.

Overall, even as a one-agent player, he definitely excels with making the most out of Fade’s abilities.

a/n: depending on whether or not anyone is actually interested in this i may turn this into a series,,

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

WIBTA for calling the police on a squatter/tresspasser?

Using the emojis 🍋🌿 so I don't lose this question. I know the title might sound pretty bad, and normally I don't believe in involving the police in anything at all (ACAB, babey!), but the situation is worrying me a bit, and I'd just like to consider all sides in it before it escalates any further.

First a little bit of background. I've just moved into a new apartment. It's a house split into two units. I have the bottom floor, and two friends of mine live on the second floor. One of my housemates upstairs, let's call her Jenna, has been living here since November. I moved in mid-December, and our third housemate, let's call him Mike, has just finished moving in as of last weekend.

Now on to the actual story. In December, Jenna got injured and has been having trouble getting around. This is especially tough because she has three large, rambunctious dogs that have to be let out multiple times per day, and she also works long hours. Since Mike wasn't moved in, she decided to get someone else that she knew to stay in her apartment and help out with the chores/dogs. I don't actually know his name, but we'll call him Peter for the sake of clarity.

The very first week Peter was there, Mike brought some stuff over to pre-move a bit. While there, he met Peter for the first time. Mike knocked on my door immediately (this was like 10pm). He said he was really sorry to show up unannounced, but that Peter was upstairs acting super weird and erratic, and he was pretty sure he was high on some kind of narcotic.

Now, normally I have no qualms about people using whatever kind of drugs they choose for themselves. But the previous tenants had been kicked out for various issues stemming from drug abuse. Our landlord was VERY clear on his strict no-tolerance policy for illegal drugs in the units. Jenna has the maintenance crew in and out of her unit all the time for work, and neither me nor Mike wanted to chance something of Peter's being found, and Jenna & Mike getting evicted after less than a month on the lease.

The three of us decided he would have to find someplace else, and that Mike would just take over Peter's chore duties. Jenna apparently spoke to Peter about finding someplace else to stay. I thought that was the end of it. Time went on, Mike moved in, I forgot about Peter entirely and assumed he was yesterdays news.

Yesterday while I was at work, our property manager showed up and caught Peter hanging around in the backyard. There was a confrontation and Peter refused to leave. The property manager ended up getting the police involved, and we all discovered he'd been living in the crawlspace under the garage for some time. They also found several items down there he'd stolen from houses in the neighborhood. When I got home, I was warned to keep my doors locked just in case, and they also told me if I had any suspicions he had come back that I was to inform the police immediately.

On the one hand, I understand that a string of pretty serious crimes were committed here, and that not calling someone about him would be unsafe and irresponsible. Not to mention, the thought of having essentially a stranger squatting in our crawlspace for a week was pretty upsetting for me and Mike, as we are both SA survivors. But on the other hand, I feel kind of terrible for Peter. He hasn't really bothered us beyond the drug use and the squatting, and he clearly must have been desperate to resort to living under there, especially considering its been a harsh winter where we live.

I don't want to be callous and deny him shelter if he really has nowhere else to go, but I'm also *extremely* uncomfortable at the idea of letting him stay, especially considering he's apparently been stealing as well. I know it's kind of a crazy situation, but I'm having a bit of a moral quandry about it, so any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

What are these acronyms?

[worlds-oldest-teenager]

I’m interested. How do Apollo and Artemis’s desire to protect each other drive a wedge between them?

I'm glad you askeddd. Thank you for being my first anon ever btw. (@crowmakeska-boom idk if you are the anon but anon, whoever you are, sorry for the wait). This is probably not a very good meta cause it's mostly vibes, gut feelings and filling in the blanks with below the bare minimum of textual evidence but oh well. 

First I'd like to talk about why I think Artemis and Apollo's relationship is kind of distant. They're a confusing duo. When you first meet them in the titan's curse it may seem they don't like each other much or atleast Artemis seems to not be paticularly fond of her brother. Calling him “irresponsible”, “lazy”, “big headed”. But reading between the lines reveals how much the two of them care for each other, especially on Apollo's part from all the illegal help he was dishing out to the questers.

But then when you read some more, their relationship just feels a tad too distant to completely take what they say as just banter. When we see them on Delos in Blood of Olympus the distance is literal. They're recycling banter that's getting old and you can tell that even if it had been lighthearted before, it’s definitely getting on both their nerves now (stolen from fsinger lmao). They’ve both been playing the part for a long time but it feels like they don’t have the closeness anymore to recognize they’re both just playing parts. 

So what happened?

I think it's their need to protect each other that's causing this rift between them. From my point of view Artemis & Apollo are protecting each other from different things but Olympus is at the core of it for the both of them.

The twins have a very different experience of Olympus. Since her introduction Artemis seems pretty critical of Olympus. According to the hunters she's the only one who can get the ball rolling during solstice meetings and she's shown to not really act the Olympian way. Taking the sky off the shoulders of a mortal girl. Shrinking herself down to make the human heroes feel more comfortable and demanding they get rewarded.

It wouldn't be far fetched to assume that she's never fit in with Olympus and doesn't agree with most of the views of her family.

Then there's Apollo.

Who fits in so perfectly with the messed up inner workings of Olympus or so people think. He's perfected his mask over the years and no one is the wiser about the abuse he's gone through or even the fact that this isn't actually who he is.

To me, Artemis wants to protect Apollo from Olympus' true nature. In her head she's got every part of Olympus figured out and for the most part she has. Even if it's not something that works for her I think she would want to protect her younger brother from knowing what the kind of people he surrounds himself with are truly like.

I feel like Artemis would be conflicted on it for other reasons too because if Apollo is aware of the kind of people the Olympians are and he's alright with that, what kind of god is Apollo?

So she'd much rather think of him as stupid and irresponsible cause those atleast mean that it isn't he isn't a bad person. But I feel deep down she doesn't really believe completely that what she knows of her brother is correct.

But then she sees the way Zeus loves Apollo and cares for him and in her mind it's the right decision to let him live this way. He is safer now than they ever were as children.

Apollo on the other hand wants to conceal their father's true nature from Artemis. We know that he cares deeply about appearing fine on the surface because of how others would worry and who would worry more than his older sister.

Artemis and Apollo may be the protectors of youth but the first ever youth they protected were each other. It's the foundation of their relationship and caries on into the present day. Both of them feel a desperate need to protect each other.

I would go so far as to say that this is THE relationship they have with each other. The both of them never find comfort in each other, only protection. You can tell that comfort is not something they usually derive from each other from the way they're both completely blindsided by simple things like an "I love you" , a hug and just concern in general.

Comfort from each other is not a priority for them no matter how much they crave it. The twins purpose to each other is to protect.

So of course Apollo would never tell Artemis about the way Zeus hurts him.

I also think there's a little bit of denial on Artemis' part on just how abusive Zeus is. Cause Apollo is dropping hints. Even the way Artemis talks during Blood of Olympus makes it clear that she understands Zeus is gonna massacre the guy. She just doesn't want to believe it will be permanent.

And it's got a lot to do with the fact that she wants to protect him. Because if she acknowledges this isn't a situation Apollo is gonna come out from unscathed that means that she's incapable of protecting him. That means that she's failed to protect him before and cannot protect him again.

So she'd much rather pretend that Zeus is persuadable and not that bad. That it's Apollo's fault Zeus comes down so hard on him and if he were a little better and a bit more like her he could be safe.

And this would hurt Apollo because Artemis can pinpoint exactly what Zeus is like. But instead of comforting him she confirms for him that this is his fault. That if he could be better none of this would happen. Artemis helps prevent but never helps heal because helping her brother heal means he was in a position to be hurt in the first place.

All this mess and miscommunication and disbelief stemming from the fact that they love each other and never want to see each other hurt creates an impossible distance between them.

But there is light at the end of the tunnel. Slowly but surely they're trying to comfort/ seek comfort instead of just protect each other.

I wept on my sister’s shoulder. I felt like if I let go of Artemis, I would fall back into Chaos. Huge parts of my identity would shake loose, and I would never be able to find all the puzzle pieces. “Whoa, there.” She patted my back awkwardly. “Okay, little fella. You’re all right now. You made it.”

Apollo's trials sucked. But I'm glad it's given the twins the opportunity to bridge the gap between their relationship again.

[thejockout]

As time passes and I release more files, an increasing number of people DM asking whether I'd be interested in trancing them personally. A few have even requested to do this with me as an altered commission, which they'd pay for on a regular basis as I work with them! To date, I have not said yes to anyone: and I'd like to take a minute here to explain why. If you're one of the people who's asked, offered or suggested this, don't feel bad - I've never given a stance on it. But I'm doing it here now!

Reason #1: As a subject and tist, my "field of expertise" lies in pre-made mp3s. I had my dalliances with sites like Hypnosis4Guys and a few sessions over Skype/Discord back in the day, but they were almost all disastrous. Of maybe... 8/9 separate individuals, 6 violated my set boundaries (by recording me, by jerking off when we'd established it would be a sfw session, by trying to change the topic of trance to get their own suggestions in place) and I frankly have no interest as a subject in repeating this experience. So I stick to MP3s.

But that also means that I have little practical experience of live trance work on either end; I'm sure that I could improvise some BS as well as anyone else can. I'm not so down on myself that I think I'd never figure it out. But I don't have a history with it, and I'm pretty hesitant to pick anyone as my "first subject" who'd have to sit through me fumbling my way through a few sessions before I figured it all out.

Reason #2: Compared to producing 'nosis MP3s, live trance is a whoooole different ballgame intimacy-wise. And it's one I don't feel equipped for because of how seriously I'd want to take it. Needing to provide aftercare, working with safeties, ensuring a sub's comfort and ease... these are all considerations that are uniquely challenging to account for in live trance, and ones I'm very hesitant to do with a stranger as a result. Even something as simple as needing to guarantee my internet doesn't go out, or that I don't get interrupted... I wouldn't be able to live with myself if something went wrong/a subject had an abreaction when they were under for me.

Hypnosis is a tricky business, and it can dredge up unpleasant/unwanted emotions in people pretty easily if you strike the wrong chord (which, in this whole space of TF kink, is possible if not common.) I have had panic attacks a not-insignificant number of times in trance, and I know how scary it can be. I would want somebody more experienced/educated than myself to help me through it if we were trancing together.

Reason #3: To date, I don't consider I've gotten enough training to be engaging with these pseudo-therapeutic topics on a specifically one-to-one basis. I already try to step lightly around certain topics like image and self-worth in my files because I'm not a psych grad and my only "qualifications" in hypnosis or therapy are short-form courses. (I am, however, pursuing further education in hypnosis and doing a course on it right now.)

But this is complicated because the suggestions a lot of subjects in this space want, me included, can really put you in a psychological minefield. Things like habit change, strong TF ideas, ego effects and permanent change ✨... they're closely tied to our sense of identity, self, sexuality, etc, and there IS a risk of some butterfly effect when you go plucking these strings. I'm not criticising other tists for tackling these issues/themes via live sessions. Their choices are their own, and their subjects are choosing their tists just as much as the other way around... but personally, I would feel irresponsible dipping into people's minds in that way.

But then... why are files different?

Ultimately, a file is different because it's premade; I am writing a script, I'm telling you what it contains, and it's up to you to decide if that's right for you. There is no learning on the fly what I'm speaking about (assuming you read a file description), and you've at least broadly decided you like the theme I'm exploring. After pretalks and setup, a live trance is improv; even if you're working repeatedly with a subject on their specific desires, that requires a flexibility/change that demands a lot more "Navigation" of the sub's psyche than files do. It's more involved. As I said earlier, it's more intimate. And it's a lot more responsibility.

I still try to be responsible with my files. I pay attention to safeties, ethics, etc. I am wary of encouraging irresponsible behaviours without appropriate softening, and I generally temper my own desires a little when writing to avoid causing harm inadvertently. But that same caution would make live work very challenging to do well, so I haven't yet.

Sorry for the seriousness of the post, but I figured it was worthy of a full response. Thanks for reading.

[jamelslivres]

Hama

Let's start with the canon(ish) timeline:

Assuming that the young woman with the hair loopies is Katara's grandmother Kana and she's around the same age as Hama, I'm going to say that both are in their early-twenties. This is because Kana needed time to emigrate from the Northern Water Tribe. Yue got engaged at 16, and the healer Yagoda thought Katara was old enough to be engaged at 14. Judging by these engagement customs, Kana was probably engaged and then left around 16/17. To give her enough time to cross the world and settle in, I'd say that she and Hama must be around their early 20s.

During "The Puppetmaster", Hama says "the raids started over sixty years ago". Based on this, Hama is in her 80s during the events of this episode.

As she is describing her escape, Hama says she "walked free for the first time in decades". This could mean anything, but given that she hasn't started graying yet, I'm going to say two decades. Making her in her 40s when she first escaped.

Now, when did Hama get to the village we see in "The Puppetmaster"?

I've collected the relevant pieces from the show and discussed them. I truly can't make up my mind on this point, so I'd love to hear what others think. Let me know if I missed anything or if you guys have different interpretations of the evidence.

Here is what is said in the episode:

A merchant explains to a customer that he won't have any ash bananas until next week. The customer then says 'oh right, the full moon'. The merchant then says that he can't lose another two delivery boys to the full moon.

This interaction, to me, can be used to justify that Hama either has or hasn't been kidnapping people in this specific village for a long time:

Kidnapping in the short time interpretation: The merchant looks to be around sixty or slightly older, so he'd have been around when Hama came to the village (if she arrived immediately after escaping in her 40s). Let's assume he's been running this business for that long. If Hama started kidnapping people near immediately, I'd assume the lost delivery boys incidents happened near the beginning of that time. In this case, up to four decades ago. The merchant might not bring up those incidents to a customer who is (two?) decades younger than him and might not remember that incident. Since telling the customer is kinda bad marketing and makes the merchant look irresponsible or reckless. This could imply that these incidents are more recent.

Kidnapping in the long time interpretation: The customer doesn't need to be reminded that the full moon is that night. He knows it instinctively and doesn't need the merchant to connect the dots between the two day journey and the full moon disappearances. This awareness of the moon phases could imply that this has been happening for long enough that people have been habitually paying attention to the moon for a long time.

2. The guy who tells Aang, Sokka, and Toph about Old Man Ding says he's the "only one person who ever saw it and lived".

The word "ever" here implies that this might have been going on for a long time. However, local legends are quickly made and inflated, so the timing might just naturally be exaggerated.

3. Old Man Ding interaction, in which he says, "I'm not ready to get snapped up by any moon monster".

Honestly, I don't know what to make of this. To me, this reads like a semi-recent event, but I don't have anything to really back this up. Apart from maybe Ding saying he's not ready to get snapped up by a moon monster in response to a conversation about his age, which could imply that he was already old when this event happened.

Fun fact: the credits say "old man dig" even though the subtitles and voices clearly say "old man ding" (: 

Now for some speculation:

If Hama escaped in her 40s, the earliest she could have gotten to the village was forty years ago. In my opinion, that is a LONG time to be kidnapping people and not get caught. However, she does only have the opportunity to kidnap people once a month, but still that seems like a really long time. This brings me to the part of this that is just me asking questions (so again, please let me know what you think!)

When did Hama start kidnapping people?

Did she go to other villages before she came to the one we see in this episode? If so, did she kidnap anyone in those previous villages (I'd guess yes)? If she was in other villages, was there a point before she started kidnapping people, or did she start immediately (I think it could be interesting if she struggled with it for a bit, then gave into the urge. Or even if the urge didn't appear immediately)?

Did she ever try to go home? If so, did she find that she wasn't able to let go of the need for revenge, and leave again?

[literaila]

a virus 

tasm!peter x fem!reader 

summary: 

“did you try turning it off and then back on?” 

“three times.” 

warnings: peter is an asshole, reader is an asshole (a great paring i assure you)

a/n: this was a work in progress. and now it is out on the internet. because i need storage and you need some of my sarcastic comments 

*

in all fairness, you were a little bit stressed. 

and by a little bit stressed—depending on a paper for 30% of your grade without any internet. 

or a computer that worked. 

and of course, the lack of any manners. 

"did you try turning it off and then back on?" 

if you were going to try anything it would be banging your head against your desk until you properly erased any record of your existence.

"three times." 

the man--who by the way, left you on hold for five minutes--hums. "what'd you say you were doing?" 

"trying to write a research paper." 

"on sketchy websites?" 

you take a deep breath. you try and avoid yelling at this man through the microphone. “from a bunch of google approved websites,” you say, voice tight. “what can i do to get it working?” 

“it sounds like you have a virus.” 

“great," you drawl because this conclusion had not occurred to you. "what do i do?” 

the man is silent for about thirty seconds, and then: 

“i can get you an appointment to bring your computer in sometime in the next week.” 

“what can i do to get it working tonight?” 

there’s a quick huff of air. “do you know how to code?” 

“are you serious?” 

“that was rhetorical.” 

if this man didn’t sound completely nonchalant, about the age of a fifty-year-old—meaning your age—and had any more attitude than he does, you would hang up. 

if your paper wasn’t due tomorrow, you would hang up. 

“i need my computer tonight.” 

“you could try walmart.”

“aren’t you supposed to be helpful?” 

the man laughs like this is funny. “sorry, i’m a bit out of practice. most people don't click on the link a random ‘banker’ sends them.” 

“i didn’t click on anything.” 

“you have a virus.”

“i’m really bad with computers. i’m pretty sure i’m incapable of clicking anything.” 

“apparently not.” 

“can't you do anything? you’re smart.” 

“you assume that because i got this job that i’m smart?” 

“okay. you’re supposed to know what to do.” 

“i could fix it,” this man says, “if i was there.” 

he also hates you.

“okay, great. just tell me what to do.” 

“i already asked if you knew how to code…” 

you groan and fall over in your seat. 

he laughs again. “you could ask for an extension.” 

“an extension,” you repeat because you obviously haven't thought of that. 

you obviously don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. 

“for whatever you’re working on.” 

“because that’s how life works. are you going to ask for an extension to fix my computer?” 

“im just saying.” 

“no. i already got the extension.” 

“you already got the extension?”

this man thinks you’re an idiot. 

he’s also got a very nice voice. 

“there were some… personal problems. my professor was nice enough to make an exception.” 

“but not nice enough to do it twice?” 

“it feels wrong to ask.” 

“did it feel wrong to put it off until tonight?” 

you pause. looking for an argument that isn’t there. “you need to work on your customer service.” 

he laughs. “so i’ve been told.” 

and you stop. 

you think about all of the possible solutions to this problem. 

and the man who you have subjected to your irresponsibility. 

“i’m sorry,” you whisper, knowing that he can hear. “i’m being rude. i’m just stressed.” 

“it’s okay. you’d be surprised how many people yell at me each night.”

“i don’t think i would." 

he laughs. his voice is smooth and warm. a bed to fall into and sleep until eternity. “what’re you working on, again?“

“a research paper.” 

“is it done? are you just editing? because there are libraries open all night.” 

“no. i thought it was, but there’s a… it doesn’t matter. and it's cold.” 

“you have more research to do?” 

“yeah.”

“is it a lot?” 

“no,” you say. “not really.” 

there’s a brief pause. 

he might’ve hung up already. 

but then the man whispers, “okay.”

you wait. 

“what should i look up?”

*

"wikipedia." 

"just click on it." 

"this is how you got the virus." 

you sigh again, fingers tapping restlessly on your desk. 

you've been sitting here for the past twenty minutes, waiting for this boy to listen to you. 

he hasn't, of course. it turns out that you both share the lack of social ability. because you can't seem to be nice to him, and in return, he understands none of this. 

but he's pleasent enough. he laughs at your absurdity instead of mocking it. 

and you've already thanked him more than once. 

"i wouldn't have a virus if someone was better at his job--" 

"--that's a strange thing to say to someone helping you--" 

"now, will you just read me the quote?" 

"you're stressed about a research paper in which you're using wikipedia as one of your sources?" 

"i'm stressed about failing out of college." 

"that's not really how it works," the boy says because he's infuriating. 

but also nice. because he's been sitting here arguing with you and still hasn't hung up. 

even when you threatened to steal his computer. 

nonetheless. 

"i know how it works. what does it say?" 

"it says 'find another source.'" 

you are silent. you type a million curse words into the text on your phone. swear to whatever god is laughing at you right now that you will get them back. 

swear that you're going to go to bed right now and face the actual consequences of procrastination. 

or you'll fake your death. either way. 

"i'm not going to help you bomb an essay," the boy scoffs. "i'm gonna go look at the websites linked." 

"or you could just do what i say." 

"who's the one with the computer here?" 

"...what does it say?" 

*

"i disagree." 

"you disagree on the undeniable brilliance of footloose?" 

you spin around in your chair, smile slightly unnerving. "i disagree that you have good opinions." 

"says she who has broken her computer." 

this boy has a warm voice. he has a slightly teasing tone, even when he's attempting to be serious. and in the short time that you've known him, you've already picked up on the sardonic voice. different from his sarcasm. 

"the internet broke my computer." 

"the internet is a very noble place. it would never. now, scammers on the other hand..." 

"i understood about three percent of what you just said." 

he laughs, microphone muffled as something moves in the background. "okay, so you hate good movies. noted. what do you think about good tv shows?" 

"like what?" 

"um," he pauses. "friends." 

"i really hope you didn't just say that to me." 

"there's a reason that it's popular." 

"that reason would be conventional attractiveness combined with stupidity." 

"or that it's really good." 

"you know, i know a really good doctor. he can help you." 

any research paper that you may or may not have almost finished is forgotten. 

instead, you've been talking to this boy--the boy who refused to help you fix your computer and instead has monopolized this conversation completely--for the last hour. 

about movies and school and winter break. leaving and never coming back. 

anything, really. 

he is surprisingly easy to talk to. easy to laugh at. 

and, of course, you're completely delirious because it's four am and you have a paper due in the morning. but, at this current moment, it doesn't seem to matter. 

you want coffee. 

"maybe you should give him a call," this boy says. "not for me. just... to chat." 

"i am very mentally stable," you say, thank you very much. 

"you threatened me earlier." 

"an un-rare occasion, i'm sure." 

the boy laughs because there's something funny about that. "i'm very likable." he mocks your tone. 

"again with the opinions..." 

"i can't just not share them." 

"you can actually. you really can." 

and you, apparently, can't hang up. 

*

"no." 

"wow. and i thought we were getting close." 

"as usual, you're wrong." 

he laughs. "this is ironic, coming from you." 

"i'm hanging up." 

"you still need to finish your research." 

you scoff, throwing another piece of paper at the wall. 

it's not a waste, merely art. 

"i just have to finish the citation. easy." 

"that is definitively the hardest part." 

"maybe for you, tech guy."

he laughs again, softer this time. 

you've both gotten quieter. laughter is a mere whistle in the wind. 

and your throat is a bit sore. 

you've been talking to this man for four hours.

"how long are you supposed to be on the line?" 

"it's available until two in the morning." 

"it's almost six." 

"yeah." 

"you've just been sitting here talking to me?" 

"well, it's not really worth it to go to bed anymore." 

"yeah." 

something lingers. 

"i'm peter, by the way." 

peter, you think. you wonder nothing about him. you think nothing of the name. 

you think about walking around campus until you accidentally run into someone. 

"y/n," you say. 

he echoes your name back to you. 

*

part two

my masterlist here.

tags:   @moonlarking-blog @v1ci0us @preciousbabypeter @alexxavicry @directioner5life @inthegetawaycarwithtaylah @localrockstargf  @thestudiouswanderer @take-my-hand-time-boy @thoughtsofagodlovingsunflower @nyomjoon   @raindropstearsandtea @rqmanoff​

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

I am back to complain more but do you ever notice how like. Every pet that isn't a cat or a dog is often labelled "exotic"? It really confuses me. It seems like sometimes a very good domesticated pet and a wild animal that is deeply unethical to keep as a pet both get put into the same category. Idk. I don't like when people do that. I don't think "cats and dogs" and "not cats and dogs" is a very useful way to categorise peoples pets.

I have also seen people suggest that the only domesticated animals are cats and dogs!

ITS RIDICULOUS

humans have NEVER only practiced husbandry with domesticated animals. NEVER.

first off... we had to domesticate things in the first place

second off... most animal husbandry until recently was practical, not companion-based, so *all* pet husbandry now is just very different from the past

third off... many populations of animals have been "tamed" for human husbandry, including things you would never imagine to be possible (Cassowaries! FUCKING CASSOWARIES WERE REARED ON NEW GUINEA.)

fourth off... Human-Animal Bonding (HAB) is in fact a universal thing - we see signs of it across animal groups (and probably other organisms, but anthropocentrism = not acknowledging plants have feelings), with zoo animals and even wild animals bonding with humans in a variety of forms, leading to a release of bonding chemicals in both the human and the non-human animal's brains. idk where this "your pet cant love you" shit came from, because the science shows it happens in the most random animals (fish. fish release bonding chemicals with their humans. fish.)

fifth off... there are SO MANY ANIMALS IN SHELTERS THAT NEED HOMES it is irresponsible to say that people shouldn't have x or y pet if they are able to actually take care of it (admittedly, there are many ACTUALLY exotic pets where that last part doesn't count, but not as many as these anti-pet schmucks say)

sixth off... so. many. things. are. domesticated. chickens! pigeons! ducks! geese! and you know what? a lot of those things DONT MAKE GOOD PETS. domesticated doesn't equal good pet, and non-domesticated doesn't equal bad pet. it's NUANCED. NUANCED. LIKE EVERYTHING.

seventh off... the actual problems that occur in pet care come from not respecting the animal as an individual and as a different kind of individual than yourself, not from an inherent problem in caring for certain kinds of animals. you have to view the human-animal bond as a *partnership*, not a hierarchical relationship, that just happens to include you physically caretaking for the partner. bah. when you think you "own" the animal, have control over it, get to dictate it - that's when you have problems.

eighth off... there are many animals that can *only* survive in captivity, whether its proper pet care, a shelter, or a zoo/aquarium. maybe they're disabled, maybe they were reared by humans, maybe they were traumatized. the list goes on. so many people would just "free" these animals into the wild where they would, ya know, die (remember Keiko, anyone?)

ninth off... anthropocentrism means assuming other animals want the same things as us... I s2g if I see another person say "oh poor pet birdie in a cage it should be free" when I know for a fact these pet birds actually appreciate the safety and security as long as they get enough out-of-cage and bonding time...

tenth off... this all goes back to the fundamental truth that humans are a PART of nature, that we are ALSO ANIMALS, that we are just connecting with other creatures and that is NORMAL, and it is OKAY that we shape the world, the problem is HOW we shape it... like... we are not separate from nature, and thinking that is how we got into this climate crisis in the first place!

G A H

idk what the actual definition of "exotic" pet should be, but "non-domesticated" isn't it

[ilikepjo24]

@annie-handholder rebloged a post I made with some Ursa and Azula art (that does not belong to me, I just got permission from the artist to share it on this platform) and those were the tags, and I'd like to address them.

First of all, there's no indication of Azula being spoiled. Being a prodigy and being praised isn't the same as being spoiled, you are simply getting recognition for the skills you do have that are great and do deserve recognition. To assume that this recognition isn't essential and is actually spoiling a child will only serve to un-motivate them. So Azula receiving praise for being good at stuff is just a normal thing. You try hard and are skilled and you get praise as a reward. This isn't being spoiled.

Being spoiled is to be harmed in character by being treated too leniently or indulgently. This is a definition that I copy-pasted. This definition does not fit Azula. We see Ursa make an attempt to set boundaries and be stern whenever the situation called for it. We even see Ozai tell her to fuck off when she asks for credit for her own plan (which wasn't good parenting, it was toxic as well, but it was the opposite way. If giving your children too much praise is toxic then not giving them recognition at all for their own achievements and ideas is the other end of the rope, and both are toxic. You should find the middle ground and give your children the proper amount of praise).

Additionally, we don't see anything that would imply that Azula is being spoiled with material possessions. We see her get a gift once, but that's all. It's not like she goes around pointing at things she wants and everyone breaks their back to get her that thing. She's not obsessed with material possessions, as you'd expect a spoiled child to be.

Yes, Ozai did not address her bad behavior, in fact, he encouraged it when it didn't affect him personally. But he also nipped it in the bud when Azula did something that annoyed him. And Ursa addressed her bad behavior too. So it's not like Azula grew up spoiled and without rules because her parents let her do whatever she pleased. The problem is that the rules that were in place by Ozai weren't the correct ones. Instead of being a decent dad and person and teaching his daughter to also be a decent person, Ozai just taught Azula to not be a bother to him. And she did do that. So Azula did follow the rules that were in place for her. You wouldn't call a child that follows rules spoiled. At this point, you have to realize that Azula wasn't the problem. She wasn't spoiled. She followed the rules. The problem is that the rules in question were unreasonable. So you can't really blame the child and call them spoiled. You have to hold accountable the people that set those rules in place.

If Azula behaved the exact same way, but the rules she had to follow were the ones society has agreed upon, she'd be a model child. So she's not the problem. She's not spoiled. The problem is that she was playing a version of the game with different rules that the agreed upon, socially acceptable ones. The one to blame in this situation is the one that set her up for failure and taught her to play the wrong version of the game. I'm looking at you, Ozai.

The child isn't spoiled, she follows rules. The problem is the irresponsible parenting. So you can't just go ahead and paint Azula out to be the problem. It's shifting the blame from the irresponsible parents to the misguided child. It's simply not fair.

So if Azula wasn't spoiled, then why didn't she realize Ursa loved her?

Well, that's because Ursa wasn't that good at showing it. I have made multiple posts about how Ursa parented Azula, and so have a bunch of other people. The truth is, while Ursa was strict with Azula when needed, she was too lenient with Zuko, with who she clearly favored and spend more time with. I'm not saying Ursa didn't love Azula, but I am saying that Ursa could have done more to express that love, and then Azula would know it's there.

[princess-of-the-corner]

Ya know how I said Gabriel descends further into villain from Origins to Miracle Queen?

Ironically Marinette seems to go through a similar thing, or reveal more facets to her character that are less paragon but its very much by accident.

I like Marinette, but the fact this stuff never seems to get acknowledge or addressed both ends up hurting the story & in the fandom it makes it hard to discuss without being perceived as a salter or apologist, ETC.

Like, bear with me.

Season 1 Mari is basically fine, she's good, heroic, any flaws she has are fairly minor but some could be taken as 'hints' for later while still not being an issue.

Like her meticulous Adrien schedule could literally just be info she picked up associating with him that she wrote down. A little odd but not like, terrible, terrible.

Her sabotaging Bubbler's music is certain an irresponsible use of her powers but its far from the most irresponsible a hero is with a Miraculous & she is fourteen and people/protaganists can be flawed.

& her tear down of Lila, but she seemed to realize she went too far & tried to apologize. & after a point Lila staying out of school because of it starts to feel less like a Marinette issue & more a Lila (Or Gabriel) issue.

Season 2

We start to see some other potential issues emerging here, but they can still be rationalized away.

Chat being left to fend for himself is her having faith in her partner & she is going to get help.

Adrien being kept in the dark is more Fu's deal than Mari's & she is the one who presses him to bring Chat in.

Her decision to make Chloe QB again does paint a target on her back & could be tied to Adrien or rank pragmatism, but she does seem to make a genuine effort to sympathize, so at worse the target is an accident.

Less justifiable but still explain-able is encouraging Chloe's mean-ness so she can bond with her mother being a poorly thought out attempt to getting them to bond & assuming it will make them better.

The lack of follow through when the opposite happens does feel like its an issue but one can see why a kid mightn't make the connection.

Using Chloe on Heroes' Day is again, explain-able, IE it does paint a target on her back but shit was indeed dire.

The real red flag so to speak is her reaction to Kagami.

IE characterizing her as an evil witch& only stamping down on her interpretation to benefit Adrien, not because she realized that was wrong.

IE, Kagami's done 0 to warrant such a negative view of her & there isn't really a positive way to spin this one as just good intentions gone awry, someone else's fault or an accident.

Season 3

This is when it all comes home to roost so to speak.

With Kagami this comes in deliberate attempts to sabotage or even embrass and sabotage her. This continues even after Marinette realizes Kagami is actually a nice if lonely girl and befriends her.

But it gets worse because even if Kagami's ID wasn't known to the public (Though it makes sense that it is) the dialogue still acknowledges Hawk Moth knows!

She is painting a target on her friends back wile sabotaging her date!

There isn't really a good way to explain this one, which might be why I know some fics basically seem to outright pretend it didn't happen.

Meanwhile with Chloe the lack of follow through issue becomes text.

IE, she paints a target on Chloe's back by using her twice in short succession, then ghosts her even though its clear Chloe's trying to communicate with her.

Even if attacks weren't happening near her home this would be bad.

But when finally pushed into acting on this reality, the second its convenient to use Chloe in combat again she does so. Making it loud and clear to Hawk Moth that if the situation is dire, he knows where to get the Bee Miraculous & its wielder.

This is a big issue because unlike "Making Chloe a better person" which in universe is not Marinette's job. As the person who gives out Miraculous, as the leader she has in fact made herself responsible for what happens to Chloe in regards to Miraculous business.

She can't abdicate on that one except maybe to Fu who also damn well should have known better.

Which leaves the story with Marinette willingly putting two people into danger and using them opportunistically either out of rank pragmatism or for outright selfish reasons. Then just like, not acknowledging the risks or consequences, with one of these people even being her friend.

It makes her come off as ether a lot more cold, or a lot more out of touch with the consequences of her actions than almost anyone else.

Neither of which get acknowledged in the narrative so as before, it becomes hard to even talk about without being seen as smearing the character or being unfair. Or like you just need to ignore these traits even if the story no longer works because of it and Marinette ironically becomes a less interesting character.

Cos like, a Marinette who can become extremely, even ruthlessly pragmatic the moment she needs too. Or one who is genuinely that taken away with her crush that its effecting her morality to the point where she can become harmful. Those are interesting ideas to explore!

They don't make her like, more evil than Hawk Moth or whatever, & if handled well could prove really interesting. Especially as they could parallel Gabriel's behaviors in regards to Adrien and others. Thus letting him be a sort of "Oh shit, is this who I could grow into in twenty years if I had money/power & zero people to check me?" villain.

But instead even noting it seems discouraged in most of the popular sphere's, or worse and well, we know the show doesn't take issue with it.

See it's.

I do love this about her and find it fascinating! As a character in a piece of fiction, I mean. I don't /want/ her to make these decisions, but /on paper/ I'm eating popcorn as I watch it unfold.

A lot of this does stem from Marinette's black and white mentality and overall being naive. Everything is all or nothing with her.

Sometimes this comes across in her thinking of people as good or bad. While she tries, it's hard for her to think of Chloé as 'good' and it's hard for her to understand that even if Chloé wants to change, it takes a lot of time and isn't just flipping a switch.

And while there's past precedent with Chloé, this shows up again with Lila. She never entertains the idea that Lila may just be lying for attention because she's bad at making friends. Lila is lying and lying is bad so clearly she's a manipulative bitch that deserves to be publicly humiliated! Like with Chloé, she may back down for a moment when called out like what Adrien did, but it doesn't last long.

Kagami is the eventual progression into twisting things. She's not overly friendly and sweet and social, but she /is/ in competition with Marinette for Adrien's affections. So she twists the idea that Kagami must be an awful person, despite doing literally nothing, and deserves what Mari does to her. And while she does befriend Kagami and feels some guilt, I think a combination of 'this is for True Love™' and not wanting to admit that she was a jerk and wrong makes her keep sabotaging her.

And it's a similar thing with her actions as Ladybug.

At first it's things that make sense: trusting Chat to do what he can on his own with little information, just like they've been doing for all of Season 1.

Then she gets Fu telling her that things are too risky for anyone else to know. So she doesn't tell Chat things. Because Fu is an Adult™ and their guide in all this, so ofc he's right even if Marinette thinks otherwise at first. And this is hammered in with Chat Blanc and Ephemeral. If Chat knows more, things get fucked.

And then we get Marinette justifying keeping secrets for the Greater Good™. Whether it just be not telling Chat anything, or lying to all of Paris to make sure Adrien never finds out his father is a complete fucking asshole. Secrets are good. She's doing the right thing by keeping them so that it doesn't hurt anyone. If he knew things would go to hell.

In theory I find all this fascinating! But while there's been a hiccup here or there, usually caused by Adrichat going 'girl what the FUCK?!', on the whole the narrative chooses to see this as the good and right thing rather than a flaw that Marinette needs to overcome.

[johannestevans]

rewatching M3gan with a friend and considering like... the theme of parenting and caregiving and people's desire to not take responsibility for caregiving and social responsibility and delegate those tasks to technology

like I don't feel that M3gan is actually hugely anti-tech compared to a lot of other films and tv series in this space, but its criticism is so much keener and like.

is all about distance between people, lack of community and responsibility

like just the fact that cady in the car with her parents, the mother and father are arguing right in front of her, but the mother is going about limiting screentime and the father's basically going "Oh but if she didn't have that, she wouldn't shut up"

the purpose of the toy and the ipad is not to bring their daughter joy or to entertain her or anything else in the dad's mind - the purpose of the toy is to keep her occupied so that they, her parents, can think about her and her care as little as possible

esp bc the aunt is such an irresponsible person who like... makes toys for kids, but doesn't see kids as full human beings and doesn't care about the ethics or study of them? like, eavesdropping on kids w a machine learning model is unethical

but she obviously doesn't give a fuck about that, and it's obvious the way she talks to cady and about her, the way she snaps about toys, doesn't purchase anything for her or plan ahead bc she's focused on work etc, like. there's no consideration

she's rude af to her neighbour but also like. the conversation where she goes "control your dog" and the neighbour goes "i just spend 80 dollars on a shock collar"

aka, i spent money on a device that doesn't train or care for my dog for me

shock collars, like pretty much any negative reinforcement, doesn't work on dogs or cats outside of specific situations, and electro shocking your dog just randomly when it is "bad" ISN'T training it. it's just teaching your dog sometimes it will be tortured, randomly

but it's a stopgap used by irresponsible, unethical owners who want to make their dogs "good" as fast as possible without learning about dog behaviour or training, and ideally not paying attention to them

and cady is. an incredibly mild-mannered and self-effacing child. she sits placidly and obediently when she has NO TOYS in the house, watching TV, bc she doesn't know or feel confident playing or exploring otherwise

like when she says "It's okay" to her aunt about not having anything is ridiculous bc it's NOT okay

i think the child protection agent has a horrible attitude, esp when she makes a judgy comment about someone being in their PJs in their own house

but also when she goes "i just unpacked them this morning, i don't think she plays with them anymore" about cady having toys is SUCH a lie but like... it's once again about not taking responsibility for her actions as a caregiver

also the fact that nicole was homeschooling this poor fucking girl like. no wonder she's frighteningly self-effacing and not at all wilful as a child, and why she's so utterly LONELY

like it's interesting seeing her play with the toys and robotics stuff and how engaged Cady is because it is her like, actively teaching her about the subject and engaging, and the thing is like

I don't think gemma is inherently bad or cold for having collectables or not having books in her house, her home is quite soulless but she's obviously into this kind of stuff and that's not nbd

what sucks is that like. she's terrible at socialising with anybody, not just her niece, but EVERYONE - she's a stereotypical autistic in tech, and i think it's easy to criticise her more bc people assume that bc she's a woman she has to be More Maternal or whatever but like

it's not just her relationship with Cady that's distant, it's her relationships with everyone EXCEPT technology - because technology she can control, she can shut down whenever she feels like it, she doesn't have to consider respect or autonomy, let alone giving them grace to make mistakes or learn and develop, or learn about her as she's learning about them

it's one-sided and she gets to control the entire thing, which is the opposite of a caregiving relationship

[princescribbler]

Some USEFUL REMINDERS for CG/L Dynamics (Especially Online or LD)

Presented in no particular order or significance, a few useful reminders!

Your Caregiver is more than just that... they're a complicated, whole person with interests outside of CG/L, ABDL, and kink.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, likes to be introduced or harassed online with "Hi wanna be my mommy/ daddy/ little" as an opening line. Like... that's a huge amount of effort, time, and responsibility to take on just cuz somebody you don't know asks... it isn't gonna happen.. if you want that, work for it and build a relationship!

Reminders are great! Send them to your partner, yourself, your friends, whether it's for daily tasks like checking in with a CG or boring work stuff... be the person people appreciate because you check in, give reminders, and generally enable everyone to succeed easier.

There will be extremely tough days where you'll feel bad and want to give up your kinks, your fetishes, etc... and that won't fix a single thing. See, whether you're kinky or not; Jobs suck, renting sucks, everything sucks sometimes! Stop blaming your kink for your problems and accept that you might need to find more complicated answers than just hating or blaming kink.

You and only you are responsible for your fetish activities... you choose how you engage in them, even if it's at someone else's supposed "orders." Don't see yourself as somehow not an active participant!

Consent is key, and informed, enthusiastic consent is key. Whether it's hand holding, keyholding, sex, cuddles, or just sexy messages and texts, consent is key. If you don't get it, don't get kinky with them. And major important note: coerced or manipulated consent is NOT consent.

Pixar and Disney remain excellent at any age, and you don't need to be a little to enjoy! Seriously.

Littles can be toxic! Yes, there's tons of fake caregivers, fake switches, fake and manipulative buttfaces out there, absolutely. But littles can be toxic, too, and if you're seeing those toxic behaviors within yourself, you need to change. Now... it isn't acceptable or fair to damage others with your toxicity just because you're afraid to change and grow!

Consent is needed from all involved, including spectators. Don't bring your kinky stuff in public without the consent of ALL impacted parties. Don't make the whole community look bad, either!

Depression, anxiety, and mental health in general can be a risk when adopting a kinky lifestyle. Don't ignore them or just try to work around them... it won't work. You need to deal with them, and social relationships can help but sometimes you need professionals, not just friends.

When in doubt, assume you should be doing the responsible thing..I know, especially for bratty subs, that it is hard to choose to do the responsible thing... but seriously, being a little isn't an excuse to EXCLUSIVELY do irresponsible or naughty things!

Things like diapees, pacifiers, bottles, most little or ABDL or CG/L gear can be passed off by just saying "Oh, it's for a friend" because everyone assumes there's a friend with a kid. When you accidentally feel exposed... just try to remember most people don't care, or notice, and if they do they probably assume it's a misunderstanding. Stop freaking out!

Your caregiver isn't your therapist. They're not here to fix your emotional trauma from childhood.. they might help you, but they're not meant to fix your whole life just because you let someone be in charge of you.

You are still an adult, even in littlespace... so you need to act like it when it comes to serious stuff. Money, sex, responsibilities, these deserve an ADULT view and should involve your ADULT mindset in participating, unless you and your caregiver have a very specific and well negotiated/ understood agreement about power exchange and decision making... and even then, you should still be an active part of the planning.

Everybody fucks up, and it's USUALLY stupid to hold a mistake against someone who means you well. Give your partner the benefit of the doubt, by default... it can be either you alone against your problems, or you WITH a partner...idk, seems like being on a team is just easier and a better way!

Communication isn't everyone's thing. If you're with someone who never learned healthy methods, you can teach and help. You aren't obligated to, I'm not saying you're responsible if your Partner isn't knowledgeable about this stuff... I'm just saying, if you know a healthier and better way, show your partner, don't expect them to just improve because you think you model good behavior.

Diaper and ABDL play isn't ubiquitous... in this community, some people love it (myself included) and others hate it, and that's fine. As long as nobody is shaming or hurting anybody, let them be, whether your kinks match or not.

Very, very few people want unsolicited pics, whether of penises, breasts, butts, chastity, diapers, etc. If you want to send a pic, check that the pic is welcomed.

Just a short, hopefully informative list than jumped into my head today and I figured I'd share!

Sending you all lots of good vibes, good times, and good luck!

As always, stay happy, stay healthy, and stay kinky!

-Scribbler

[somethingaboutvampires]

Things about Fallout that I can't stop thinking about:

Alimony is brought up meaning Cooper divorced his wife after learning she suggested dropping the bomb. The bombs were dropped while his daughter was with him so either she knew and didn't care that her daughter would maybe die or was surprised by that timeline and panicked. Coop demands to know where his family is, so assuming he brings his daughter to safety / his exwife / a vault successfully then he and his dog aren't allowed in? And he's been searching for them for 200 years so he doesn't know which vault they were taken to but assumes they're still alive.

When Lucy is at vault 4, they were surprised that she was from a vault when she's clearly in that jumpsuit with those 33 pins on her collar. Like, there's one uniform. Wtf? And they gave Maximus an opportunity for a hot shower but didn't offer to wash Lucy's uniform? She didn't wash the blood off her uniform while there.

They clearly don't have doctors or teach medical skills in vaults 31,32,33 because when crazypants goes into labor she's just doing strangely. (Edit: there seems to be one person with a dr like feel and is there when she's in labor but, ya know, zero obgyns or major medical in a vault meant to propagate human kind is shocking but also typical).

How did vault 33 not know vault 32 was dead for two years? If the overseers did, then the wedding makes zero sense, the overseer would know those couldn't be from 32. If 31 brain roomba knew for two years that there was no communication from vault 32 why did that sit right with him?

Betty, new 33 overseer says she helped McLean bury his wife and i think that means she helped him bomb Shady Sands.

No one talks about how a (edited, thanks for the correction) fusion core can power an entire town but only one BOS suit. Like the gross misuse of resources for the army, now for the Technology Cult. If they dismembered the BOS suits, they could already have more equality of power generation but no one on the show brings that up? It's not cold fusion but it's definitely something.

So typical that the BOS suits had a major flaw that killed thousands of soldiers and they never fixed the flaw.

Anyone at all wanting to mention how Lucy wanted to blow up Moldaver and everyone in that area out of vengeance, but didn't. When that's exactly what her dad did to an entire town, so that blood lust and anger and irresponsible bombing is exactly what's learned in her do-good teachings. Her naivety is stark and blowing up everyone as a symbol is exactly that.

It's strange to me that the actor of Lucy stated that viewers see her character as the hero of the show, when I just see her as a pompous naive entitled person who doesn't listen to many people, thinks she's always right, and if she did take other people's advice about a land and people she's never met and had an ounce of humility, then half of the bad experiences wouldn't have happened to her. I see no hero in this show.

I see the "average viewer" as Coop/the ghoul and that's why so many people like him best.