#or if i had blatantly lied in an interview

[tqgincorrectquotes]

Beth: Ugh, I hate talking to people about things. This is a nightmare.

[f1-birb]

To me the thing that hurts the most is that Lando only had one set of tires for quali, and he caught that chance and put it on pole. Then he got great pace and tire management during the race, and was lied to by his own engineer and threatened blatantly by his own team, after six years of unwavering loyalty and faith. And he was a person decent enough to swallow this and do the right PR thing during all the interviews AND praising his teammate who made a few very damaging mistakes during the race that shows clearly who is the better driver. Realistically, Lando still needs the McLaren car at least for this year, but what if the car is not the fastest anymore? I don't know if I should just save myself from heartbreak by just stop watching f1 because good, decent people rarely get what they deserve in this fucking joke of sport.

Sorry about the ranting.

I said I wasn't discussing but you sum up my feelings pretty damn well

this kid has been with them, unwaveringly, how many top team discussions we know he's had in the past, how many opportunities he could've had to jump ship to better but didn't, because he's always ALWAYS bled papaya

they also had Will blatantly lying about the state of Lando's tyres, especially the pics I've seen of them parked up at the end when you compare them to Oscar's...

what gets me most is that McLaren's partnered with Mind. a mental health charity. and they did that to Lando over the radio that everyone could listen to...

[m3r1m4r5u333]

Look. I'm fucking done here.

I'm fucking furious. I've had ENOUGH of people shit talking Kristen Reidel for being "antibuddie".

Newsflash you imbecils, it's OBVIOUSLY blatantly untrue!! She's been here for us, from the very start, to lay out the foundation for queer Buck and Eddie. She's written, directed and been the executive producer for some of the most monumental buddie moments!!

Maybe take a moment to understand that these shows are huge and one person does not have all the say for how things work out. These people do not work in isolation, doing whatever they like!

Let's remember that the show used be on Fox, which is arguably one of the most conservative networks there are!!!

The show already had several main queer characters and romances when Eddie's character entered the show in season 2. We also know that the main target audience is fairly tradional, and the show is freaking expensive to make without a huge profit in return. We KNOW it has repeatedly struggled to get renewed due to that.

Let's remember that creating a show like this is not an existence of stress-free creative indulgence - you are actually responsible for HUNDREDS of jobs! The show's survival! People's income! The crew isn't just a couple of known actors, it's also everyone else making the show, and these productions are HUGE. It's so many families income at stake.

So WAKE UP and realise what they've been against, creating this show.

I'm like obnoxiously queer but even I would get nervous at the idea of similtaneously airing several queer ships on a show about emergency responders, on freaking Fox!

Seriously, just stop to think. What if they had gone for blatant buddie early on?

The show would have had to juggle... let's do some math...

Hen, Karen, and Eva being queer and raising a rainbow family,

Michael's coming out storyline, then his and David's romance, Josh being very much gay and dating men... Add to that Buck and Eddie, and that's MANY prominent queer characters, story arcs and romances trying to compete for air time... ON FOX, in a show about firefighters!

The risk of the the largely conservative, homophobic audience on a conservative channel going "it's too much" and abandoning the show was REAL, don't you pretend otherwise.

Sure, there are other less easily intimidated audiences, but how would they know if the leap into the unknown would pay off?

I think in those circumstances they made a very sensible decision to focus on the other queer characters anf storylines first.

Again, it's hundreds of people's incomes at stake!!! There must have been people, funders, bosses voting against adding more blatantly queer storylines to the current situation because it was just not the right time.

So Kristel Reid was CAUTIOUS when she gave interviews. Remember, the future of the show has been uncertain from the start with how expensive it is to make!!

She did not want to give false hope to the viewers hoping for buddie come true. She did not want to be accused of queerbaiting. She very sensibly made sure to appear neutral about buddie, and give the UNTRUE impression that her head canon is that meh, they're just straight friends to her.

Quite frankly folks... NEVER PLAY POKER WITH THIS WOMAN, I think she'd eat you in a minute!!

She LIED. Fucking absorb that information. Breathe it in! You can do it! She's been obviously rooting for Buddie to happen for AGES.

Why do I say this?

Well here's my fucking powerpoiny about it!!! Read this and take a minute to consider her innocent "oh they're the very bestest of friends"-front against her actual work on the show!!

She WROTE 5x18, you know, with Ravi's line to Hen:

"I think it's sweet that Karen was defending you. I mean, isn't that what we all want in a partner, knowing they have your back?"

She's no spring chicken, she wrote this fully knowing the memory we buddie shippers possess!!!

She WROTE the scene in which Eddie comforts Buck at the hospital after Maddie's kidnapping.

She WROTE 3x01, that's the scene in which Eddie bursts into Buck's apartment when Buck's feeling down and has Chris hang out with "his Buck".

She co-wrote Eddie's disgusted reaction to meeting Abby, she co-wrote Buck hearing that Chris is going on a two-week school trip and freaking out like a mother hen,

She WROTE freaking 4x14 - You know, the episode SURVIVORS, in which Eddie is shot by a sniper!! In the queerest way possible!!

She WROTE Desperate measures, you know - the episode in which Eddie breaks up with Ana, freaking oozing repressed queer subtext all over the place!!

Have you even watched the talk Buck and Eddie have before the breakup?!!! It's INSANE.

---

Buck: Ah. I thought you'd be the first one out the door. Christopher know you're coming?

Eddie: Not yet. I haven't figured out what I'm going to say when I get home. To Ana.

---

Try telling me that "door" isn't the door of a closet, I challenge you!!

She freaking co-wrote 5x17!!! The META of Taylor, in 5x17 "promising" she won't "run the story", and then breaking that promise.

That same episode has Eddie visiting his home btw, and paints a very illuminative picture of the environment Eddie grew up in - it practically spells toxic masculinity, compulsory heterosexuality, catholic guilt. Really, that episode basically screams "This is why Eddie is such a repressed onion."

THAT episode also has THAT insane closet door scene, Eddie opening a closet door as Buck says:

Buck: You know, your parents will understand!

Eddie turns to stare at him.

Buck: ...They should understand. *Plays with a toy dinosaur as he's talking, and pretends it bites his finger.*

... And again, after that episode she wrote 5x18, the one with "Isn't that what we all want in a partner, knowing they have your back?"

An obvious parallel to Buck and Eddie meeting and promising to have each other's backs!!!

....

Seriously, Kristel Reidel has had our back from the very beginning and I'm fed up with people talking shit about her!! I think it's no coincidence that one of the emergencies she wrote was "someone stuck in a freezer", that's fucking meta. I bet she's wanted to fucking hit the pedal but she's been forced to bide her time, and it's been fucking agony at times.

And don't even get me started on Tim fucking Minear, who people have ALSO shit talked because "hE jUst liKes tO QuEerBait".

BE FUCKING GRATEFUL FOR KRISTEN REIDEL, YOU utter... *censored*.

BE GRATEFUL FOR TIM MINEAR. They are our freaking GOATS and they deserve our love!!!

Edit. After reading up some more about the power structures of media networks like these... I would really not be surprised if it turned out that the people running this show (such as Reidel and Minear, the people listed next to the episodes) have had even less say on what sort of stories they get to do than I've thought.

After all, these people we fans focus on and know by name... They're really not nearly as influential as we think. There are still plenty of big chiefs higher up in the food chain. I've heard some vague rumours before that the network has meddled with the show's creative decisions a lot in these past years, and would not be surprised if it was true.

[memecucker]

I remember a long time ago seeing a gif set of a Ted Bundy interview with James Dobson where Bundy blamed porn addiction for his crimes (and also blatantly lied about his own biography and family to do so) and it was very obviously a last-minute gambit by Bundy to avoid execution (he even said he would only give the interview to Dobson, almost as if he wanted someone that wouldn’t challenge the “porn corrupted me” stuff) and it was being passed around as actual evidence of the evils of porn viewing.

Imagine believing a dead serial killer who had a reputation for constantly lying and trying to manipulate everyone he interacted with. Especially on a matter where he was obviously trying to reduce his culpability

[gayofthefae]

Hey, I've been sad since yesterday and I thought a lot and I can say that I lost hope, I saw a video on TikTok of David talking about Byler and saying that it's not going to be a real "I don't think of your ship is going to sail " what do you think he meant it?

@nadajjk56 (just to make sure you see this in your notifs) Proof/Comfort: I have seen this. David also said that Hopper was dead(I think he's very convincing in this one by talking about character arcs and things so he is definitely good at lying with a straight face). David also said that Jopper was not going to happen. I got really stressed and nervous too but then I was reminded that he said those things.

And if you'll remember...

I still have hope.

To answer your question more directly, I think he is trying to subvert audience expectations for it to be more of a surprise. Think Alex Hirsch "leaking" a fake spoiler of Gravity Falls when fans figured the twist out too quickly.

But yeah. That felt like a definite hope-crusher to me too. I felt nauseous and had to recover and unsuccessfully convince myself it was gonna be fine. Until I was reminded that he has blatantly lied in interviews on multiple previous occasions.

For additional proof, the article on Joyce and Hopper was published between volumes 1 and 2 of season 4: well after they had already filmed the scene pictured above. So he has most definitely blatantly lied about plot points or his opinions on them when fully in the know before.

On other occasions, he was also giddy when talking about Mike and Will and said on 2022 and 2019 that he knows how the story will end(and I think he did because in 2019 he said he estimated 5 seasons) and that it is "beautiful", a word I would not attribute to a dead, heartbroken, or dismissively wrapped up queer character. So he has turned to be not consistent and and a proven non-credible source. I hope this helped lift your spirits :)

And I appreciate you valuing my analyses enough to trust me to have answers or comfort for you. That is so sweet to know <3

[meetdheeraj]

What we are having is a farce in name of elections. This is by no means a free and fair elections.

Most of the opposition leaders including two CMs who could pull in crowds and influence voters are in jail. On the other hand, those close to RSS-BJP with rape charges even are either not arrested or are out on bail or on parole.

Modi has freezed bank accounts of Congress. Opposition already has significantly low bank balance than BJP owing to electoral bonds but now even what they have couldn't be utilised. It's not at all level playing field.

At many places opposition candidates are being forced or bribed to withdraw their nominations. Case in point, Amit Shah's constituency. It's well documented how multiple candidates were forced to withdraw from there. Surat and that other place are again blots.

For ages India has had a decent election with no overt rule breaking. Asking votes on religious lines is illegal but BJP has done this openly. There are tweets with "vote on Ram" etc from official handles. Modi has openly asked vote on Ram from his rallies. Election commission refuses to act.

Modi has also been openly divisive and given communal speeches. He has stooped to so low that even imagining as much was difficult years ago. Opposition has complained to election commission but spineless three who Modi himself appointed remain as cold and reaction-less as Modi was in that Karan Thapar interview after that glass of water.

Mr Modi has been blatantly lying in his speeches. Mangalsutra, buffalo, Muslims - vary many things have been attributed to Congress Manifesto. None of which exists in their Manifesto. But media has not once called out Mr Modi's speeches. His voters, most of who celebrate Ram, whose entire story is based on a life lived around ideals of truth, seem to care less. You then wonder about them. For example, his voters dislike Gandhi who all his life stressed on speaking truth and was a great devotee of Lord Ram. Modi's voters hate Gandhi. But they love Modi who keeps on lying as if it's not oxygen he lives on but lies. What's word for someone who's more than a habitual lier? Fraud? Even fraud feels like a good word compared to the amount of lying Mr Modi has done. And he does his politics in name of Ram. And somehow worshippers of Ram (or so these people claim) love Mr Modi. I fail to understand this hate of a true follower of Ram and love of a daylight fraud.

This election is not being fought between INDIA alliance and BJP. That's unfair comparison. It's between INDIA versus BJP plus media. If it was minus media then for opposition this would have been a cakewalk. There's ten years of anti-incumbency. That alone has routed govts in past. Plus, just think of the catastrophe if media went after Modi govt like it did with UPA 2. Unlike in 2G, in electoral bonds, there's clear quid pro quo. There's Brijbhushan, Sengar, Ram Rahim, Baba Ramdev, Revanna and others that Modi has shielded. Mr Modi's 2ab, doland, strenhh, radar clouds, gutter gas and umpteen stupid comments - these are real and not out of context clipped bites like Rahul's potato one. Media has created Modi's image. Again a fraud. If Modi gave a single interview to say, Ravish Kumar, forget Karan Thapar - what do you think would happen?

[organ-market]

Weird White Men That Defy Classification: The Television Genre

How To with John Wilson, 2020

When you sit down to watch an episode of television it’s a real shot in the dark, you pray to find something truly special yet you brace yourself for potential mediocrity. The day I took a chance on 2020’s How To with John Wilson I sat on my couch, eyes glued to the screen, absolutely mesmerized. For those not in the know, How To with John Wilson is this odd thing that exists, it follows the daily exploits of New Yorker, John Wilson, as he goes around the city showing us how to do a certain task. At the same time it is absolutely not a walkthrough tutorial as rarely will I be able to execute the task described by the title card by the end of each episode. Likewise, the show isn’t really about the man named John Wilson as much as it is a lovely stroll through the people he meets on the street, the charming places he explores, and the little glitches in the matrix that stand out to him.

A typical episode of the show is more like a flowing conversation than a narrative arc, it branches out from its origins to go someplace entirely foreign and new. An episode about wine tasting leads to Bang energy drinks, scented bowling balls, and a lavish mansion party complete with historical wardrobe. John Wilson frequently interviews the everyday people on the street that we’ve all spent our lives passing by. He often highlights little niches in the city as he brings us to a fan club infatuated with James Cameron’s Avatar who go as far to learn the language and in another episode we explore the first ever Mandela Effect Convention. No matter how odd, John Wilson treats these spaces with respect and gives off an eager enthusiasm to learn more.

It is a show that defies classification and genre conventions. Sure it is technically a documentary but the genre usually insinuates an informative motive which is hardly the case for How To with John Wilson. If the show isn’t intending on spewing a steady stream of factual information then is it a reality television show which markets itself primarily on entertainment? Well, while thoroughly entertaining, John Wilson’s nasally narration and awkward insights aren’t the traditional host. It is a comedy that had me constantly laughing throughout its runtime and yet it is interested in so much more than just giving the audience a chuckle. Try as I might, I could not place this show in a box and I adore that about it, and in my search for quality programming I’ve found some other shows that similarly leapt out of each box I put it in. The only connection between all them besides having my undying adoration is that they prominently feature weird, extremely awkward white men talking at you.

The Rehearsal, 2022

Nathan Fielder’s 2013 comedy hit, Nathan For You, had me flabbergasted by its absurdity and awkward wit. While more clearly defined in the square labels of comedy there is something about Nathan Fielder’s persona that makes you want to unpack whatever the hell is going there. Nathan For You follows Nathan Fielder, a graduate from one of Canada’s top business schools, as he gives out business advice to real life struggling local businesses in the Los Angeles area. The only thing is, he's awkward and his solutions to their problems often read more like goofy schemes out of a cartoon than sound business advice. There is a mix of reality and fabrication as you are never really sure if what Nathan is saying is sincere or not as he constantly gives half truths and lies to the audience, the people around him, and perhaps himself all at the same time. His outlandish persona is juxtaposed with the business owners who reluctantly go along with his plots and blatantly unpolished ideas. One episode has discount Santa Claus pictures in the summer following the idea of how jackets are cheaper during the summer season.

The little oddities in Nathan For You become the core focus of Nathan Fielder’s latest TV venture. 2022’s The Rehearsal vehemently defies classification, it expands on his persona established in his previous work and blends reality and fabrication to a new degree. The premise of the show is a bit difficult to even explain, like Nathan For You he helps everyday people but rather than giving business counsel he allows real people to “rehearse” a scenario. Some episodes involve having a difficult conversation with a friend or simulating what it’s like to raise a child. It’s still a documentary, reality comedy but there is an earnest dedication to recreating and simulating the conversations and scenarios Nathan clients demand. Nathan creates an exact replica of a bar in episode one of the series, stains and all, in another he fabricates a relationship between one of his client’s and an actor posing as another actor’s grandfather to recreate something as abstract as feelings. This is a show that dissects the reality of its own production, peeling open layer after layer leaving us with something entirely unique.

In that way The Rehearsal is oddly transparent about its own continued creation, Nathan is open to showing us the monitors behind the scenes, the child labor laws that cause Nathan to have multiple actors for the same child, and the fact that extras can't talk which forces Nathan to have a completely silent birthday party in one episode. It is constantly reopening its own veins and reinventing itself, the core premise is under constant development as the show goes on. It’s an entertainment Frankenstein of mismatched ideas and concepts all slamming into each other creating dichotomy after dichotomy. Nathan draws out the acting we all do in everyday life through a show about rehearsing while Nathan is simultaneously playing a character. And yet sometimes he acts with such a sincerity the audience never knows what to expect. The final episode of The Rehearsal is absolutely dizzying in its conundrum, the lines of reality become marred as we follow a child actor who’s too young to even know he’s acting and Nathan being forced to confront this blatant contradiction. It is a supremely daunting task to write about that final episode and honestly I can barely wrap my head around it. I don’t want to spoil it too much but it is unlike anything I have ever seen and I highly encourage you to give The Rehearsal a chance.

Joe Pera Talks with You, 2018

The final show in this little bundle of uncategorizable strangeness is Adult Swim’s Joe Pera Talks with You from 2018. It’s the only show on here I haven’t finished as I remain in the midst of season 2, hoping to really take it slow and appreciate every little moment but rest assured from episode one I was absolutely hooked. Like How To with John Wilson the premise is much more slice of life but unlike the other two, this is completely scripted. It’s offbeat and awkward as the titular Joe Pera excitedly talks about whatever is on his mind in a somehow passionate monotone. Things just seem to happen the way our everyday happenings occur. There comes a ringing at the doorbell that introduces a new cast of characters or a conga line waiting to be partaken in. Inside of these natural happenings is delivered a wonderful simplicity, Joe Pera Talks with You ignores the narrative necessity for conflict during the majority of its runtime. I often braced myself for a cringe inducing failure in moments where Joe Pera is forced to dance or when he’s reading the church announcements. Miraculously, he never trips and falls or gets booed off the stage and although not everyone he interacts with is always happy to meet him, he doesn’t seem to mind one bit. 

That might be my favorite thing about Joe Pera, his unconventional happiness that is soothing to my occasionally anguished soul. Whenever life beats me down I just turn on an episode of Joe Pera Talks with You, his indifference to people’s expectations of what a good life is supposed to resemble reassures me that everything is going to be alright. It reassures me that I am enough. It’s a message I’m not used to when consuming media, much less a show that aired on Adult Swim. It is heartfelt and simple and enough to fill my heart and lull me into a lazy night after even the most stressful of afternoons.

I do hope at least one person reading this takes a shot in the dark and watches an awkward white man talk to them for about half an hour. These are all delightful shows that oddly feel, at least for me, paired together despite their differences. Season 3 of How To with John Wilson premiers July 28, 2023 and I for one am absolutely stoked for what this man tells me next. There’s talk of a second season of The Rehearsal in the works as well. I implore you to check at least one of these shows out! If you see any awkward white men talking about interesting things do let me know so I can grab my popcorn, thanks in advance and stay tuned besties <3

-Ghost Emoji 👻

[aspd-culture]

Do you have any like actual tips for pro-socials who have antisocial loved ones, like friends or partners? So many sites are like “dealing with a [x]? Here’s ten ways to handle it!” and then it details abusive tactics (which is blatantly stupid, IMO, pwaspd/npd already expect the world to do this to them so idk where they’re getting the idea that pwaspd/npd wouldn’t expect this behavior because their upbringing TRAINED them to expect this behavior but hey, nobody said ableists actually knew what the fuck they were talking about).

I personally struggle with an aspd trait here or there alongside a bigger bpd/npd comorbidity so I get the pathological aspect of this disorder but truly, it is hard to like. believe them when they say they care or whatever because even though I know, mentally, that the bare minimum is pretty much their way of trying to care when they don’t get anything out of it like I do, a small part of me wishes for the mask back where I got the effort and adoration I used to. It sucks but I also don’t think pwaspd should also be left behind in society just because their relational instincts got fucked up before they had a chance.

Idk. I feel like there’s a lot of ableism that people without aspd need to unpack (myself included) but it’s also like, what do you do when someone quite literally admits to manipulating you (in an effort to hold themselves accountable) and frequently lies to make their lives easier? Like I get it Mentally and I can pinpoint why their actions Are them trying to care and show care, especially if they actually do care and well, aspd innit? but the mental understanding is one thing and the craving for the emotional connection with them is another.

I hope this is cohesive and I hope I’m not imposing or being an ableist dick or anything, I just. Don’t think it’s fair to hold the disorder against them and a grand majority of people who think “HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE” about mental illness advocacy is almost always punitive and withholding and expecting an exorbitant amount of groveling or self-flagellation on part of those with “scary” disorders and idk how to approach this with sensitivity and nuance that it deserves and requires.

Ok, so first part of your question asked for tips for prosocials who have antisocial loved ones. Here I go into how to support someone with ASPD (suspected or diagnosed).

Following the tips further down in this post can avoid conflict as well as help you communicate in ways that are effective to pwASPD.

As for dealing with someone telling you they are manipulating you, try and remember that much of the socially acceptable (and even some mandatory behaviors) are manipulation. Manipulation is just trying to affect someone's feelings, thoughts, or actions, or trying to change the end result of a situation. This includes flirting, job interviews, college applications/essays, pay raise negotiations, court proceedings (on the part of everyone in that room except the judge and jury), etc etc etc. If you have ever apologized with the hope or expectation that you will be forgiven, you have manipulated for your own gain. If you've ever bought someone dinner before asking them a favor, you have manipulated someone. One of the most romantic things someone can do - an elaborate proposal where you take them on a lovely date to their favorite places and make them feel special and then list all of your favorite things about the person before asking them to be with you forever is MASSIVE manipulation. It's just not malicious manipulation. Have you ever tried to convince someone to get out of an abusive relationship? That's manipulation for the purpose of sabotaging a relationship because you believe it is what is best for another person, even at the expense of what they think about it and what they want. Does that make it wrong? Of course not. There is such a thing as being manipulative in neutral and/or positive ways - society just doesn't like calling all of that stuff manipulation because the word manipulation has been given a nasty connotation.

As for the lying, though, if they are lying to *you* consistently and not making effort to change despite communication about it (including reassurance that you will allow them to explain themselves fully without interrupting and do your best to remain calm even after that no matter what they tell you - people with ASPD need that if you expect us to give up a coping mechanism as big as lying in a close, vulnerable relationship/friendship that we don't want to lose), that is a problem. It is not acceptable for them to lie to you. You are entirely in your right to make boundaries and separate yourself if they can't be honest with you, especially about big/important things, but honestly about anything. If they're lying to other people in a way that doesn't affect you, though, why is that a problem? They are dealing with their symptoms and making certain they are doing so in a way that doesn't harm you. That is very difficult for someone with ASPD, as it would be for anyone with any personality disorder, and that effort should be respected and appreciated.

Also who *doesn't* do things to make their lives easier? If you were being asked by a creep at a bar for your number, would you give it to them? Would you maybe lie about having a partner or give them a fake number or say you had to go for a pretend emergency to get out? Yes, those lies are for your perceived safety because that situation could be dangerous, but for pwASPD (people with ASPD), every interaction with other people has as much potential for danger as the situation I described. It is understandable to not be used to seeing things that way, but that was our life during vital stages of development and there are things we had to do to adapt to that reality. ASPD literally changes how your brain is wired, so there is only so much that you can expect us to change, and one thing you cannot expect from most of us is to get rid of that belief that we are in danger. Trying to only really makes us see *you* as a danger trying to get our guard down so you can hurt us.

I also don't think "the bare minimum" is a fair way to describe the way pwASPD show love. It not being what you're used to is not the same as it being the bare minimum. It takes an exceptional amount of work on the part of someone with ASPD to try to understand, accommodate, communicate with, and avoid hurting prosocials what with all the extra effort that requires for us. We literally work more than a prosocial does to be "extra" in a relationship just to manage what you call the bare minimum. What is caring about someone if not inconveniencing yourself purely for the sake of understanding them and making them happy? What is love if not effort?

I do understand wishing for the mask to come back, but as someone who has disorders you mentioned in your ask, I'm hoping you understand why asking them to do that would be unfair, unrealistic, and ableist. However, it is none of those things to privately miss that time, and it sounds to me like you're doing the latter which is in no way problematic in my opinion.

There are ways to ask for some of their previous behavior and treatment back without asking them to mask again, if it's things that aren't symptoms of ASPD themselves. For example, if they initiated hangouts/dates more often before, it's completely reasonable to ask them to do that again. If they no longer are expressing interest in your emotions, you can address that concern. Things like that don't have to be asking them to mask - it can just be asking them to do some things within your love language. That's not unreasonable if you're being kind, communicating with them, and making sure your requests are made within reasonable expectations with their symptoms.

You're allowed to have needs and most pwASPD will respect you much more if you can effectively communicate exactly what they are, rather than a generic "I don't feel like you care about me as much anymore" or expecting us to read social cues we aren't wired to understand/look for. I have given (and stick by!) more than one pwASPD the advice to not engage with guessing games and make boundaries expecting their partners to communicate in a way they can understand easily - and thus to not adjust behavior unless they have been told that it is causing harm unless it is *blatantly obvious*. When I say that, I don't mean obvious to prosocials; I mean things like physical or sexual abuse. Even raised voices are pretty normal to plenty of pwASPD, to the point where it isn't obvious that that would scare or hurt someone.

However, if no amount of simple behavioral changes or verbal reassurance can convince you that someone with ASPD cares about you without them basically not having the disorder or letting you cherrypick allowed symptoms, then I feasibly see two choices for you. This isn't me trying to be a jerk, just being objective to what I think makes sense for you and them. The first is that you can put in the work yourself to unlearn the ways that you're used to care being shown to allow you to accommodate your loved ones with ASPD without feeling hurt. If that isn't something that can work for you, that's okay. It's okay to have boundaries and be honest with yourself about what things you are incompatible with. However, at that point, the only thing to do that would be fair in my opinion is to separate yourself from the people with ASPD that are in your life.

I'm not suggesting you never speak to them again (although you are certainly allowed to make that choice for yourself). I'm suggesting you may need to restructure your relationships with those people such that feeling like they don't care (so long as they are doing their best to show they do) won't negatively impact you. In other words, for example, if you can't handle a partner showing they care the way they do because of their ASPD, then it's your job to end that relationship with them and either entirely remove yourself from their life, or just be friends.

If that's the choice you need to make for yourself, then I think it's important that you stress to them that this is not anything they have done wrong or need to work on - that it is an issue with how you are able perceive people caring about you. It's hard to say this in a way that won't sound ableist, because admittedly the issue would be rooted in some societal ableism (not really ableism on your part, just that the way children are taught to perceive love is incompatible with ASPD and even other disorders that can affect empathy and such).

It is very important to note that most of this does not apply if what you are dealing with is abuse - meaning for the purposes of this that they know they are hurting you, they are in control of the behavior that is hurting you, and are choosing to continue it without making any effort to change despite you clearly communicate your pain and what exactly is causing it. To evaluate that, you need to be objective and really ask yourself if you're coming from a reasonable place or not. Are you asking this person to either not have a disorder or allow you to pick and choose what symptoms you find acceptable? Or are you communicating boundaries to protect your wellbeing and making compromises that work for both of you while respecting their past and their symptoms? Those are two very different things, and there are shades of gray inbetween. Asking another prosocial who has not intentionally worked to unlearn their ableism against ASPD and done their research into its symptoms or a pwASPD who has not taken reasonable steps to heal their trauma and not hurt those close to them is not going to be truly objective. If you have a therapist who is aware of and respectful of ASPD, they would be a relatively objective place to evaluate what is abusive vs symptoms they can't be expected to control, assuming you could keep your language neutral (moreso than in your ask, which while not disrespectful or ableist, was definitely not entirely neutral). However, as a person with ASPD I would always prefer my partner speak to me about their concerns over my behavior before they ask anyone else - so if you haven't done that, I would certainly advise you to start there.

Even if any of the things I said are ableist or are rooted in ableism apply to you, it's worth noting I'm not saying or implying you are ableist yourself. Evidently, you came to a blog to get help with this situation from someone who understands the perspective of your loved one as much as possible, and that shows you likely aren't ableist - but as you mentioned one can have ableism to unlearn while not being ableist themselves. Please do not take any of this post as aggressive or attacking. It was all written in a neutral tone, I promise. I am aware how my text tone can come off to prosocials, which is why I specify this. If I was upset with the ask or thought you were just an ableist person or that the ask was disrespectful/not in good faith, I would just delete it.

I hope this helps and if you have or need any clarification, have any other questions, etc. you are more than welcome to submit them to me./gen

[anonymoushouseplantfan]

I actually believed everything that was said in the Oprah interview because it came straight from their mouths. I cannot fathom that they lied so blatantly and on international television. I didn't know pr, I didn't know anyone could lie so un-bashfully and so blatantly. H&M completely took me in. I cannot believe I've been believing everything they've said for the past 3 years. I feel so stupid. I feel cheated. I cannot believe I was such a fool. I seriously need a lesson to increase my intuition and when not to trust people. I never believed in rumours and it's the fact that those words came directly out of their own mouths and I saw it that made me believe them. I cannot believe people/they could lie so easily in front of everyone. I just don't know what to say. I'm just stupid I guess.

No, you’re not stupid. We were all taken in by the pr at one point or another. We all reached a point when it just didn’t make sense any more and then we started digging deeper. It’s just that the moment of realization was different for each person.

For me, it was when Meghan issued the KP statement lying about the break-in and then immediately started pap-walking and merching. But even then I still believed that Harry didn’t have anything to do with it. The “Hero Harry” image was too convincing. It wasn’t until the Inskip wedding that I came to terms with the fact that he had to be in on the scam.

For other people, it was the engagement interview or Megxit or the Oprah interview. For some people it’s going to be this book or these interviews.

But no one should feel stupid. They literally spent millions in top notch pr to create a certain image. They had trusted celebrities and even The Queen vouching for them. Of course people were taken in! Everyone wanted Diana’s son to have a happy ending.

[my-mt-heart]

Welcome back SF, really missed your input.

That's really kind of you to say 🙏 I'm watching this spinoff against better judgment and have a lot of thoughts on it, but I'll try to stick to production topics.

[W]hy giving so many visual cues for Carol?

Like MT and you yourself said, AMC realized (somewhat belatedly) that they can't Carol-ify characters (Maggie in DC/Isabelle in DD) and expect the audience to get excited. The studio knows Carol gets engagement, that's why they keep pushing the character on social media despite the fact that officially, she's not part of TWDU. I believe Melissa/Carol is so conspicuously absent from Nicotero's interviews for related reasons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they shove Melissa and Angela aside to make their own spin off?

No, you're right, but each of the people wanting them off the project had their own reasons for it. It's not as simple as "Norman got a big head" from being the most marketed character (although there's an element of that too). There's a lot of people involved and they all had different things to gain from having these two women removed.

So, my guess right now is, it's about the money and someone less with an opinion, so both Greg and Norm have more creative freedom and a couple of spare millions to spend on their vision

AMC spent way more money this way than having Melissa be part of the show from the start, so no, it's not about money and making a TV show isn't a bunch of people compromising on what to do. (More on that a little further down.)

There are many reasons and @jaibhagwan mentioned one of them in a comment to my previous ask, "[W]ho has the most the gain by sabotaging Caryl to make himself look good writing his “love story” spinoff?" Gimple was heavily involved in S11, the development of DD and in part of pre-production, and like I've previously said, he doesn't want competition. (It shouldn't be a competition at all, since a TV show is a collaborative effort and as a viewer I'm capable of liking both Carol and Michonne. Not that the race is between the women, because Gimple doesn't care about either of them.) He wants DD to fail, so he can swoop in to save the franchise with his TOWL show.

Just so no one misunderstands this as a slight and gets upset: Michonne is one of my favorites and I hold Danai in utmost respect. I'm not comparing women or female characters. They bring different things to the franchise and that's a GOOD THING. I want more of that. I also think Clémence is a great actor and apart from the sweeping aerial establishing shots, she's the only enjoyment I'm getting from DD. My issue is with Gimple and Zabel (whose existence as a "fleshie" I can unfortunately confirm to anyone thinking he might be a cardboard cutout), and their no-good storytelling.

@rubberchickeny "They all ring untrue and like he’s trying to manage (badly) the image the media and the public have. He’s contradicting himself, and other information given."

I believe the obfuscation is on purpose and that AMC (by way of Nicotero) is also trying to shift blame for some of their more controversial story decisions.

Everything that happens on a TV show has been approved by the studio responsible for the production. It doesn't matter if you're an egomaniac actor, a spiteful hack of a writer or a burnt-out EP—no one can override the studio. Someone at the studio approved the respec of Daryl back to his S2 self, the choice to deny his found family, the nunbaiting, etc. Every single script goes to the studio for notes and then (eventually) final approval before it's locked. They approve of the episode edit; if they don't like it, it gets reedited to their specifications.

There's a method to the madness in everything Nicotero has been saying.

@kryptoniancape "So he blatantly lied about having no creative control in that hit piece?"

Yes 🤷‍♀️ and you're right, it's a hit piece. The question is why. Why do AMC and Greg Nicotero want you to think that everything that's wrong about this show is Norman's fault? I'm not saying he doesn't bear any responsibility, but this isn't a one-man standup comedy special on HBO. If he made demands AMC didn't want to meet, they could have pulled the plug on those delusions at any point.

SF

“I’m watching this spinoff against better judgment”

Translation: MT is making me watch so I can answer her long list of questions she sent me.

I guess my concern about a possible smear campaign is…are they expecting more backlash later on? If so, I’m terrified to find out what that is. I’m getting so many asks from people wondering why they should hope for a better story in S2, and even though I do think we can put some of our faith in Melissa, it’s still a valid question. Because they should be doing everything to rebuild our trust that was lost the day they announced the Caryl spinoff was canceled, but instead they’re preparing for things to get worse?

Again, all I want (as a fan and as another woman in the industry) is to feel reassured that Melissa’s getting everything a leading lady deserves and that Daryl and Carol are getting the story they deserve.

Fwiw: If Danai was the showrunner on her spinoff, I would’ve been SEATED for that. If Melissa got to showrun or direct, I’d be seated for that too. TWDU needs more women and poc making creative decisions.

[a-very-tired-jew]

1961 Article About Israel/Palestine Conflict

Due to the war going on I've been reading articles by journalists who traveled to the region after Israel's War for Independence. This particular article titled The Arabs of Palestine was written by Martha Gellhorn in 1961 and is about her travels to various Palestinian refugee camps in the surrounding region, to Gaza itself, and to Israel. In each place she interviewed the camp leaders, various refugees, and people who stayed behind and continued living in Israel.

What ensues in her 20 something pages is rather eye opening regarding the feelings of people who lived through WWII, the War for Independence, and prior to the 1967 war. However, certain excerpts stand out as they provide an insight into a mindset that has persisted all these years, and that Jewish people have tried to explain to little avail.

Throughout the article there are certain points where Gellhorn is blatantly being lied to by the people she is interviewing and a third party has to clarify to her in a different language that this is the case. In one instance a camp leader says no one is working and the population is just lounging about, but the UNRWA (yes, that UNRWA) official present blatantly tells her this is not the case and 80% of the people are not only working but the majority do not want to return.

An Israeli Jew who accompanies her at one point is excited to take her around the country to various villages for her to conduct her interviews. This person becomes disturbed when he hears children in the street yelling insults at him for being a Jew. His perception was that people were happy considering all that has been done since the war, that they retained their homes, and things were modernizing (there is a big tone of modernization as a benefit to the entire article fyi).

One of the people Gellhorn interviews is a school teacher in Israel that did not leave during the 1948 war. This teacher was a Christian Arab who became an Israeli citizen, taught at the local school, and by all accounts was doing better than he ever had before. However, he openly believed in Jewish conspiracies and the following interaction occurred.

Fig. 1-3. Interview with a school teacher in Israel by Martha Gellhorn. This sentiment is what makes a lot of Jews wary of the current activist movements as we see it in all the statements and slogans. A naive activist, whom is outside of the two groups, might think that a certain slogan or saying is simply calling for peace, but even in the 60s the mentality was "if the shoe was on the other foot they'd all be dead".

However this is not always the case and she notes that there is a difference in thinking in various age brackets. The teenagers who went to school in the UNRWA camps (they had vocational training and better schools than their host countries) often talked about leaving the region and becoming doctors or teachers. The elderly talked about how they wanted their grandchildren to become educated and have successful careers, to leave the area and see the world, and to have futures. It was the middle aged persons who festered who pined for things that didn't exist (a lot of talk resembles Boomers referring to "better times" that didn't exist) and would openly talk about teaching their young children to hate Jews. These persons, she writes, were obsessed with Revenge and Return. Another important thing to note is the ahistorical accounts or the stories that have no verification she is told throughout her visits. One person tells her that the Jews collaborated with H*tler, and are in fact worse than him, to kill their own people and thereby force them to emigrate to Palestine, thereby displacing and killing the Palestinians. Other instances are "the Jews killed all these people" to which "how do you know? Can I talk to the surviving family?" is brushed aside and more antisemitism or stories are told. In one instance someone even says the Jews were doing bombing runs and Gellhorn let's us know that the didn't have planes capable of doing that at the time. There's a lot to the article and it is accessible through the Atlantic's historic archives (if you can access those). This is not something that is common reading for most people and this write up covers only some of the content therein, while addressing the main themes. The purpose of this is to highlight that many of the things Jews are speaking out about have long been part of the conflict. The hate that we see in certain slogans and actions, and the intent behind them is something that has been openly talked about for decades. Yet we would have the current batch of activists gaslight us about all of this and tell us we're either just being paranoid or we're genocidal monsters, rarely do they engage and admit that just maybe there's a kernel of truth to our fears. Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1961/10/the-arabs-of-palestine/304203/

[twopoppies]

I actually really like it when Louis blatantly lies in an interview. He's good at it, it seems to flow right out. "I've never seen the rainbow bears." "I don't know what BDSM is." "I've never had Prosecco." Ha! He's such a little liar. I like it though because all those lies he tells that I know are lies make me feel better about all the Freddie talk. Just more easy lies. I don't like it but it's easier to dismiss when I know for a fact he's a liar liar pants on fire.

This is a very positive spin on the lying. I like it.

[cyarsk52-20]

cyarsk52-20

cyarskaren52

Mar 19

sexyheretic

Dec 23, 2022

Mr. Lanez, 30, was convicted of three felony counts: assault with a semiautomatic handgun, carrying a loaded, unregistered firearm in a vehicle and discharging a firearm with gross negligence. He faces more than 20 years in prison and could be deported.

The case, which played out as both a tawdry tabloid narrative and a weighty referendum on the treatment of Black women in hip-hop and beyond, was closely watched for both its famous characters and what it said about the recent adjudication of alleged abuse by notable men, such as Johnny Depp and Harvey Weinstein, in court and in public.

Mr. Lanez, though not a household name before the case, has seen his celebrity profile rise since the shooting, earning explicit and implied support from various corners of the hip-hop universe, including influential blogs, social media accounts and the rappers-turned-talking heads 50 Cent and Joe Budden.

sexyheretic

Dec 23, 2022

this part is particularly heartbreaking

On the stand, Megan Thee Stallion said she had initially lied about the extent of her personal involvement with Mr. Lanez, including in a television interview with Gayle King, because it was “disgusting,” she said. “How could I share my body with somebody who could shoot me?”

Even as her career skyrocketed, the assault had caused her to “lose my confidence, lose my friends, lose myself,” she said in court. “I wish he had just shot and killed me.”

Honestly I need that little Canadian twerp to be murdered.

Its already bad enough that he shot her but he dehumanized her because his poor ego was bruised and he let toxic masculinity and anger get in the way of better judgment , and he did this for two years and he knew what he had done and he still took great pleasure in afflicting emotional pain to someone who lied to the cops to prevent him from becoming another black man, another hashtag, another beaten or killed by police , another name, another screaming for his mother, another (insert name of black man woman or child who was abused or killed by cops or white supremacy I.e emmitt till, Trayvon martin, Eric Gardner, Mike Brown, Sandra bland, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd etc) and let all these biiitch arss gossip girls and 🐈’s arss male rappers make offensive lyrics about her and make light of her too, (just blatantly dickriding that “man”) and not giving a single fquck by the fact that they are breaking her spiritually and emotionally even after that vertically challenged twat gets his comeuppance and you wonder why I’ll always be heated about this?

That’s a sociopath.

To hell with him.

To hell with everyone dehumanize meg.

May the ancestors strike you down hard

GIF by yeahnothatsnotgonnahappen

[titleknown]

HELLOWEEN #20: CALOPTERA

-CHYLOPTERA is a Scribe of Hell, with 5,663 maps of the locations of Hell and 23 letters of certification to his name. He may be called to send plagues of insects, bats, fire or aether upon the sender's rivals and call strange rains for both beneficient & malicious  ends, and may grant information upon the locations of Hell for use in summoning, though this is unreliable.

He appears as a great iridescent insect with the wings of a bat. Do not ask him for information upon the affairs of Hell otherwise, as he will give it to you vociferously and speak of it even unprompted, but most of it will be lies.-

...It is interesting to note this entry because, while the author of the Last Testament is unknown (though there are some hypotheses, including my own), the fact he advises against summoning Caloptera (using one of multiple alternate spellings from other sources) for his profession in Hell but rather the areas of his expertise, and advises against using his advice, which suggests a certain level of experience and pragmatism I cannot help but respect...

...At least, as far as diabolists go I mean. Diabolism is often ill-advised and definitely dangerous, and the fact that the status quo is that mortals end up attempting summoning them first before far less dangerous and deceptive options sends me... sends me... Well, I could talk about it, but I feel as if I should have more consideration for your time, and this is afar from the topic at hand.

It has been noted numerous times that the residents of Hell have been willing to give me their secrets, a fact I feel both honored and disquieted by, but you may wonder how I plan to prevent these secrets from being revealed.

Well, according to my preference for stealth in action, I have decided on a tactic of concealment by way of misinformation, in terms of having it published by today's subject.

They are renowned as a mapmaker of Hell and as an information broker par-excellence; far beyond the reputation of Ranamah despite her generally superior skills at both (though her reach is limited). They are also known as a great and terrible liar, terrible in the ways great liars are in that they include just enough truth to convince you the rest might not be false, and just enough lies to convince you that his real lies won't blindside you.

Indeed, as they bloviated on their past, I was mainly putting pins into things to cross-reference with his records. if there's one thing the ascendant and obnoxious of Hell share with mortals, it is their love of self-aggrandizing, a fact I leveraged with simple flattery to convince him to publish my book, buoyed by his reputation of lies to obfuscate its truth within Hell (though you and I know better)

Cross-referencing the records and my other interviews, indeed his reputation preceeded him. His secrets of most of the demons I asked about were blatantly untrue unless you knew them merely from "vibes" rather than actual experience, usually flattering himself and the powerful while slandering them, the slander published about Giobella being particularly... spicy (Though she apparently found it amusing). 

Beyond his statements about certain... proclivities in Acabus, I found that one of the few things he had told the truth about was his apprenticeship with Titivillus. Titivillus the legendary Great Scribe of Hell. Titivilius... 

...OH GOD HOW I HATE HIM, I HATE HIM SO MUCH, YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH BULLSHIT THAT MOTHERFUCKER HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE STUDY OF MONSTEROLOGY ALONE, EVERYTHING I DO TO PROPERLY CHRONICLE THE MULTIVERSE'S BESTIARY AND HE ROLLS IT BACK BY FUCKING DECADES! OOOOOH I-

...I apologize, I got slightly heated there. Needless to say, I do not like the man. But it is curious how Caloptera spoke of Titivillus as a close and dear friend who "rescued me from iniquity" despite the fact that, by all accounts, Titivillus hated him. The lies were not even necessary, as his reputation from his work with them and his genuinely honest mapmaking already seemed to be the main pillars of his reputation.

Perhaps it was simply an attempt at promoting his name, perhaps it was his way of re-writing history to pretend to be loved. I perhaps suggest the latter, given another indication of his record was that before his apprenticeship, he was quite an accomplished soldier. Working in the field mainly, but powerful and deeply feared.

I had heard about this before, but when I asked him about it, he merely said nothing and gave a thousand-yard stare before very quickly attempting to change the subject. Perhaps his lies and flattery are overcompensating for this past he seems so quick to dismiss, given his most common epithet was "Caloptis The Loveless"

An amusing antecdote before I leave, I will note that when I entered the records hall to find information, I noted a list of individuals prohibited from entering the archives. One of them was Caloptera. Multiple others appeared to be Caloptera in various states of disguise...

-Xavier X. Xolomon , Monsterologist and Understudy to The Librarian Of Babel

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

The concept for this one came from me wanting a flying demon, and then with the parts on hand me thinking of a very specific Calvin and Hobbes storyline (BATS AREN'T BUGS) and following through with him as an overly-confident liar kinda came from there.

Also, note his insect head isn't from a "true bug," which was a concidence, but one which I am happy to take credit for!

The outburst over Titivillus (a real demon from folklore, noted for spreading misinformation) was admittedly partially inspired by Dan Backslide, partially inspired by my very real grudge against RJ Palmer for making the issue of trying to un-fuck the Creative Commons a million times worse! Because I am nothing if not petty!

As per usual the whole descriptions, designs, ectcetera from this project are free to use as you see fit under a CC-BY 4.0 license so long as I; Thomas F. Johnson, am credited as their creator!

[thelonesomequeen]

If the AD article with Chris was initially on the strike list, but it was written after that, how did they know in June it referred to Chris as engaged in it? ….. Because those are two separate things that have nothing to do with each other?//

“It was initially on the strike list, but the article was written after that” makes it sounds like the article was written after the June update you were given because the strike didn’t start until mid July. To me at least the June update made it seem like the article was written, including describing Chris as engaged, and pretty much ready to go, but it got delayed because AD was just waiting for reno to finish for final details/photos. I’m not trying to discredit y’all, or pull some gotcha moment. The semantics just genuinely got me on this one.

I think without having all the information it’s easy for thing to get misinterpreted (respectfully, and to a degree, not to the point of delusion and threats). Y’all are in such a lose lose situation with stuff like this. You don’t share inside info you get? You’re gatekeeping. You do? You get a bunch of people creating their own timeline for how it happened. Idk how y’all do it. I wouldn’t have the energy. Hope you’re saying cool and enjoying the end of summer 💗

To clarify, the commentary about a strike list was a conversation we had with our contact earlier in the summer when we reached out to ask if the strike could cause any issues. That was at a time the strike started when no one really knew what was going on with any of that. Whether interviews could be done, whether actors could attend comic con or not, etc. The “strike list” was essentially a list of articles with actors they had to look into to make sure it was still okay to go ahead with those articles without violating the terms of the strike. We never really shared that part on the blog because we didn’t need to and once it turned out it was all going to be fine, mentioning it kind of made it a moot point since the article was and is still set to release. Hopefully that makes sense.

Yes, we believe the article was written after our June update, but as the update said, there was no reason to believe it would include anything about Alba because her rep info wasn’t listed.

Yes, a delay occurred because the renovations weren’t done. But that delay occurred before we knew anything about the article at all and before we mentioned it on the blog.

Misinterpretation can happen from time to time, but it doesn’t help when people do it intentionally to spread lies. It’s blatantly obvious when they do that. If genuine confusion takes place, people need to come ask us for clarification instead of running to other blogs and making assumptions with other people who then take those incorrect assumptions as fact and start spreading it around. 🦎

[spinningbuster98]

Mega Man X4 (Zero) Ending

(Insert funny ha-ha meme joke here)

Ok strap in ‘cause this is a long one.

Gameplay wise the only things of note are the General, who I am convinced was not fully designed for Zero since hitting him with a sword is pretty damn awkward, and Sigma who can either be easier or harder than he is with X: easier because Zero cand dish out more damage but also harder because Zero doesn’t have X’s armor uphgrade so he takes more damage, Sigma’s rock launching attack especially is the bane of my existance since it’s random and you basically have to pray he doesn’t spam it too often.

No it’s the story that’s going on that we gotta talk about

Of course there’s the whole deal with Colonel and Iris which is just amateurishly told: we don’t know who these people are, the game never spent any time trying to establish their relationship with Zero, and yet we’re supposed to care about their deaths, Iris especially who really has no personality and is the perfect poster girl for a female character specifically designed to die so that the hero can feel sad.

Also if you’re wondering what that orb that Iris uses is: it’s Colonel’s core. Colonel and Iris have a whole backstory that the game never even alludes to but rather just spares for secondary materials such as artbooks and dev interviews, which is impossibly frustrating from a storytelling perspective and a franchise-wide issue unfortunately (even Classic is guilty of this as I’ll get into later)

However the part I wanted to focus the most on was the flashback where we see Zero fighting Sigma

On its own merits the scene does what it sets out to do pretty well: it follows up on the idea that Zero was made by Wily which was previously teased by X2 and this game’s first Zero cutscene by showing us how unhinged he was in the past but without outright telling us he’s a Wily robot and while still making us wonder what happened to him to make him good eventually. The early X games mostly tried building up to some grand finale and really pushed for Zero’s mystery and his inevitable confrontation with X, so this scene is actually really good in pushing said mystery forward and also keeping fans off the edges of their seats for whenever said mystery gets properly adressed.

And therein lies the issue: it never was properly adressed.

Sure, X5 tries to follow up on all of this by giving us some....vague answers, which is fine, not everything should always be blatantly spelled out for the audience, I don’t need Wily to come flying into the scene with his UFO telling us that he was Zero’s creator all along since it’s made pretty clear already with all the imagery and allusions.

The issue is that no game has ever truly explained all of the questions that are brought up by this scene, which in another work of art would be ok to me, but the x series’ writing has never garnered any kind of....trust in me to believe that the series just didn’t know what it was fully doing with this, because some details about this scene have been revealed in the past.

In additional materials.

Of questionable canonicity.

Which gave us information that was sometimes contradictory with other things.

Ok let’s do this generally ok?

Question #1 Why is Zero acting like a crazed lunatic?

A few years ago a developer document was discovered, dating since before X1′s release, featuring a rough outline of the X series’ storyline, indicating that the devs at the time had at least a general idea of what they wanted to do.

The document mentions that Zero was created by Wily to be the most evil robot ever, but was accidentally turned good by the Maverick Virus (more on that later), which would normally turn good robots evil.

The Megaman Zero Official Complete Works also mentions this idea in one of its pages:

however said page specifically mentions that this information was only considered during the series’ conceptual period and as such may not be canon. I think we can safely assume that it isn’t, given that this page also claims that the Maverick virus originated from....X? Yeah no that’s explicitly contradicted by the games

Even the X1 document may not be 100% canon, seeing as plans can change over the years and it doesn’t mentions the Virus secondary function as a way to explicitly reprogram Zero into being Wily’s ideal robot as mentioned in X5.

In general I think the idea of Wily purposefully making Zero so violent he’s uncontrollable to be just plain dumb, especially since X5 shows us in its bad ending just what Wily wanted Zero to be like and it sure wasn’t the irrational lunatic we see in the X4 flashback

In 2010 a timeline of events was posted on the japanese official site for the Megaman Zero Collection. This timeline introduced the idea that Zero had a flaw in his programming which made him ultra violent, forcing Wily to seal him in his capsule, which was also chock full of Maverick Virus, the same virus that, as seen in X5, has the potential to rewrite Zero into being loyal to Wily.

Now this makes much more sense. I’m....not too keen on the implication that Zero wasn’t infected by the virus despite being exposed to it for 100+ years but only being infected once his armor was damaged since 1) damage received has never been shown to affect wether or not a robot is infected by the Virus, even in X5 Zero isn’t all that damaged when he gets fully infected in the bad ending, and 2) you’d think Wily would consider this tiny detail before stuffing his creation in a capsule with a Virus of his own creation. My own personal take is that Zero was already infected in the sense that the Virus was in his body but was simply not affecting him outside of the occasional headache (which is supported by canon, since X5 explicitly states that huge and very potent amounts of the virus are required to fully “fix” Zero, what kinda bug did Wily accidentally put into Zero’s brain Jesus Fuck), but by damaging his head (as in the flashback) this allowed the Virus to affect his damaged components thus only having a partial effect: curing him of his insanity but without restoring his memories of his creator nor his mission, thus resulting in the Zero we know and love.

The main issue with this timeline is that it was taken off of Capcom’s site years ago and thus this information is no longer officially available. Of course this doesn’t deny the fact that capcom once used it and claimed it as canon, but as of now this means that there is no longer any fully official explanation as to why Zero behaved like he does in that X4 flashback

Question #2 Why does Zero become a good guy?

All sources consistently point to the Maverick Virus affecting him, however the specifics vary: the idea that the Virus was meant to fix him was however essentially confirmed in X5.

Question #3 How does this relate to Sigma going Maverick?

This is something the games themselves have utterly failed to convey aside from a throwaway line in X8.

All secondary materials mention Sigma being infected by the Maverick Virus, however the specifics on how the infection occurred vary between official sources and widespread fan interpretations mostly born from the extremely vague way of the series at handling all of this stuff.

The official stance, as far as I’m aware, is that Sigma was infected by the virus as it was leaking from Zero’s capsule and was thus airborne inside the lab.

Many fans however spread this idea, which I don’t know where it originated, that the Virus passed from Zero to Sigma, changing hosts.

Ok so...

1) Why would the Virus do this? How could it sense that Sigma would be a better host since Zero was beating the shit out of him?

2) We never see the Virus simply change hosts under any circumstance. It’s a virus, it multiplies and spreads infecting multiple people, it’s not a single parasite jumping from host to host.

3) The idea that by leaving him for Sigma, Zero turned good implies that Zero was created as a good heroic robot and was thus given the Virus to be evil, which is stupid as it implies that Wily purposefully made a good robot for his world domination plans and then later developed an evil virus to fix his blatant oopsie. C’mon.

I know that this last bit was fan stuff but I wanted to adress it anyway

So basically the mystery setup by this scene has never been properly adressed by the games and information about it was only dripfed to us through secondary materials of questionable canonicity which sometimes even clash with each other

I love Zero for his character but his backstory is a giant mess, or at least has been told as one, this is one of the biggest writing screw ups in the franchise outside of X6′s existence.

This is a big reason why I want an X9: the chance that they might finally fix this mess

Y’know the whole Wily and Light backstory that MM11 showed us and which really added lots of layers to Wily’s character? The general gist of that backstory had been a thing in the series for DECADES, but had only been reserved for secondary, obscure materials. Would you have ever guessed, by playing all the other games, that Wily had a personal vendetta and inferiority complex towards Light? He never spoke to him on screen before MM11 sans a brief concersation to him and Megaman in MM10!

If MM11 could finally show us the backstory to the series’ main villain after 30 years, giving him some really interesting layers and finally making things between him and Light crystal clear to fans, then I don’t see why this couldn’t be done for Zero’s backstory and that of the Maverick Virus. This is important stuff, it’s the basis for the entire conflict of the X series!

Rant over. X4 (and the X series in general) is my go-to example for Story-Shit-but-Game-Good