#or maybe high key

[s4ms-w0rld]

just watched Venom: Let there be Carnage…gayest shit i’ve ever seen. the plot is basically two guys that are in love, get in a fight, one of them gets shitfaced, the other gets desperate to get him back, they get back together, and that’s it. and then ofc they kick ass and defeat the big bad villain or wtv.

[violetscanfly]

How has it been almost a month since I posted oops, have a Hange doodle dump with one (1) Levi and a sneak peek to something I've been working on for a while now :D

>:)

[ch1zzie]

The original in the bottom

Plus the picture I mainly drew but decided to draw the rest for funny

[mechagender]

whats his deal

[raayllum]

This could be completely off but given what we know:

1) Powerful life and death magic (deep magic? dark magic? both?) demand sacrifice, typically in the form of blood

2) Kpp'Ar called his arm wounds "an ancient and disturbing practice" which fits with Aaravos' sole distinction that the 'blood of child' spell is "one of the old spells"

3) In the time leading to his decision to give up magic, Kpp'Ar captured a giant likely in hopes the giant could read a map that would lead to unicorns in what we now know (7x01) is called the Garden of Innocence.

4) There is also something at the Garden that is required for successfully making a Moon primal stone, which is directly related to Aaravos' desire to invert life and death somehow

So Kpp'Ar doing what he could to try and save Soren would match up and reveal an interesting thread of his character, especially in terms of stopping Viren from (literally) doing the same. Not only would these threads convene to help explain how maybe Callum would do dark magic (Aaravos offering up a corrupted Moon primal stone for his usage to save Rayla, or something, as Aaravos needs the corrupted stone to corrupt/invert the Nexus) or deep magic again, but it would likewise give context for how and why.

[danmeichael]

If SY were to interact with other MXTX characters how many and who do you think he'd be able to wifebeam

the only characters he absolutely would NOT be able to wifebeam are hua cheng, xie lian, and lan wangji. i believe without a doubt he would wifebeam wei wuxian though. he is so vulnerable to beautiful scholarly autistic men.

the majority of side characters are absolutely done for though. wen ning? gone. obliterated. pei ming? fucked. absolutely fucked. sy bottles bisexual awakenings and forcefeeds them to unsuspecting victims. jiang yanli is a married woman but i think she and jin zixuan could blow his back out together. aromantics are immune from the romantic implications of the wifebeam but will still be obsessed with him in some way. only lesbians are safe.

[miau-exe]

I will also post this here. Greatly enjoyed @spookberry ‘s oc-ification of scarlet, now Miranda Rooney :) she’s very cute. Watercolorsssss

[chibishortdeath]

Mspaint is really fun actually—

[levil0vesyou]

[seaweedstarshine]

Hi! Long time no yap but I've been really bothered by this thing and I know you're just the person I can go to with this (even if we don't always end up agreeing at times).

I got into a tiff with someone in a comments section of a post that was about Amy (Which character do you think deserved to become a villain? or something similar). They brought up Amy's abuse of her boyfriend. I may have tried to defend Amy (key word is tried. I am officially rubbish at debating) but then I may have said something? Because they said that I (and apparently a lot of other fans) was excusing Amy's abuse because of her trauma. It got me stumped because isn't young Amy's treatment of Rory rooted in her trauma? Did I miss the memo where we separate trauma and abuse? Am I missing something?

That statement bothered me a lot because if there's one thing I never want to do it's defend an abuser. So here I am, humbly asking and hoping to clear the muddy waters.

Your really confused and disturbed moot, Tia 💌

TIA!!!!! Thanks for the ask 💌 , and I send you all the hugs.

Discussion of abuse, trauma, ableism, infidelity, and unhealthy relationship dynamics beneath the cut.

(First off… while I really appreciate your faith in my explaining skills <3 <3 <3 my passion for traumatized characters and mentally ill+neurodivergent rights doesn't make me especially qualified to fully clear muddy waters especially not knowing the full context, but I feel you, and what follows is my informed perspective!)

Speaking generally first, harm done in media is best examined by the impact on the audience, with a different lens than harm done to real people. While relatable experiences in media can be useful and validating and incredibly important, you can’t be “defending an abuser” when the abuse is fictional. It's actually normal for traumatized/ND/mentally ill people to project onto mentally ill villains, when villains are the only significant representation for those stigmatized symptoms in a media landscape that excludes and demonizes us simply for existing. RTD can't stop people who hallucinate from reclaiming the Master's Drums and projecting onto the Master, for example — 90% of the best Doctor Who psychosis fic by psychotic authors is about the Master, whether RTD likes it or not. It's not true crime.

(This is speaking generally. Amy Pond is very much not the Master.)

Abuse is a behavior, and there can be many reasons for it, but reasons based in trauma don’t make it not abuse (some forms of generational trauma can propagate abusive parenting styles, when the parent thinks abusive parenting is normal, or lives entirely vicariously through their child). This absolutely should not be taken to mean trauma correlates with abusive behavior; rather that abusive behaviors from traumatized people are more likely to present in specific ways.

Abuse is also a targeted behavior, based in control — not consistently displayed C-PTSD symptoms as seen in Season 5 Amy Pond through many aspects of her life. Mental health symptoms don't become abuse just because they hinder one partner from meeting the other partner's needs. Any life event can do that.

Without knowing the context of the arguments, this is the aspect of their relationship I've seen you talk about before (which I also feel strongly about), and what I assume is what you were debating? So, here I will talk specifically in regard to Season 5.

We all know Amy — she's never attached to Leadworth because she never wanted to leave Scotland, no steady therapist because none of them stick up for her, can't stick with one job yet her first choice is a job that simulates intimacy because her avoidant behavior (a known trauma response) isn't sustainable to her wellbeing. Rory knows her fears of commitment stem from her repeated abandonments, it’s why he’ll always wait for her, and it's why he blames the Doctor “You make it so they don't want to let you down.”, who apart from having caused a lot of her trauma, has actively taken advantage of her being the “Scottish girl in the English village” who's “still got that accent,” because he wants to feel important, so yeah, I think interpreting Amy's issues (and how Amy and Rory transverse them) as Amy abusing Rory indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of their relationship, as well as a misunderstanding of the (raggedy) Doctor’s role in Amy’s formative self-image (which of course she works through in Season 6, but I am sticking to Season 5).

Abuse is always based in control. That just doesn’t fit here. While Amy's detachment from her real life includes things like calling Rory her “kind of boyfriend” (which she is upfront about to his face; differing commitment levels isn't abuse, though it can be a relationship red flag for both parties IRL) — her Season 5 disregard of Rory’s feelings occurs only in response to the fairytale embodiment of her trauma. It's never a response to Rory; it's a response to the Doctor, who stole her childhood and led her by the hand to her death. She cheats on Rory with the Doctor in her bedroom full of Doctor toys, drawings, models, she made from childhood to early adulthood.

(And yes, like many repeatedly-traumatized people, Amy is prone to being sensitive and reactive. Take her “Well, shut up then!” line in The Big Bang; but given Rory responds to this by hugging her, clearly he doesn’t take it as her actually dismissing him. He knows her better than that.)

And by no means do I meant to imply this is fair to young Rory, poor Rory, who's left struggling with the feeling that his role in her life is in competition with the role of her trauma (aka the Doctor). But not every unhealthy relationship dynamic is unhealthy because of abuse. Labelling Amy's treatment of Rory in Season 5 more accurately isn't the same as excusing her harmful choices — but making mistakes is part of being human, Amy's mistakes are certainly understandable, and she works through them out of love for Rory.

If there's one thing to say about Moffat women, it's that Moffat allows his female characters the same grace that the male characters *coughTENcough* have always had, to hurt and struggle and make realistic mistakes and overcome those mistakes and to heal without being demonized.

Amy isn't perfect, but she is a fully realized character, and her story gives us a resonant depiction of childhood trauma.

[ashpkat]

in my idealized version of the books (the Good timeline), jericho and constantine’s relationship is not the one aaron and calls relationship parallels — it’s constantine and joseph. in this essay i will *gets taken out by cassandra clare’s snipers*

[pisshandkerchief]

getting psychosexual in the workplace

[meezer]

in high school people used to visit each other's classes a whole lot. sometimes this rando would just walk into your class and you'd be like who's that? and people would say oh that's so-and-so's friend who came to visit. she'll be going to her class in like 5 minutes. sometimes upperclassmen would just show up to your class to meet the new kids, that's how we regrettably met redacted too.

[the-busy-ghost]

Me normally: Let people love what they love

Me, after a Test Match Special commentator expresses their belief that the new All Creatures Great and Small is somehow "better" than the 1978 version: This is pure insanity and TMS can no longer be trusted on anything, how can they even be trusted to know about cricket, do they have no TASTE

[articwolfclawartist]

I don’t consume the franchise’s media because it’s “good”, I consume it because I got emotionally attached to the characters as a child and now I can’t let go

[atopvisenyashill]

how would daeron ii and myriah react to walking in on baelor and maekar having a suspiciously incestuous moment? would daeron have flashbacks to his parents and uncle and try to separate his sons as much as physically possible?

Hmmmmm.

So the thing is, I don't know that he'd immediately make the connection between gay targaryen incest and regular brother-sister targaryen incest. It's not to say that he wouldn't be hung up on the incest aspect of it, but I do think the gay part of it would throw Daeron a lot more than the incest part. I also think it depends on exactly what they're doing - like who is bottoming basically, and I think he is going to see whoever is the top as the aggressor, and he's going to conflate this with his father's sexual affairs rather than with the aegon/naerys/aemon love triangle.

I think Myriah is likely to be a bit more normal about it. When you look at like, the way everyone sees the Renly/Loras affair as extremely goofy behavior from both of them, or Jaime straight up being like "Oberyn fucks dudes he's not worthy to fight for my brother," the people in Dorne are very respectful of Oberyn and his sexuality. It's like, just another cool part of him; he's so deadly, he's so smart, he's so hot he pulls men AND women. I'm sure there would be a different take on this if he had a long term male lover instead of Ellaria (hashtag Willas/Oberyn is real) but ultimately, Oberyn's status as a second son with a very permissive brother makes his sexuality just like, part of his rascally nature. So I think whereas Myriah would be really stuck on "oh my god my sons are fucking" I think once she realizes Daeron is stuck on the "my sons who are both men are fucking" aspect she's gonna be like "I mean....well it's not like they'll be making any bastards this way, which is only a plus for us right now."

I think there would be an initial push to separate them and marry them off in an attempt to straighten them out (lol) but I think if Baelor or Maekar kick up a fuss about it, Daeron won't push back very hard so long as they're both married and having kids. Personally, I think this whole thing might kinda freak Daeron out - I guess my read on him is someone who is like, suuuuper straight laced, not dissimilar from Ned when it comes to sex and marriage, and the idea that his son and heir is having an extramarital affair AND as Myriah helpfully points out, is having that affair with his BROTHER absolutely triggers some unresolved feelings about his father. I think Myriah would eventually take a sort of “well that’s just targaryens for you” esque stance, but Daeron takes a much longer time to stop being weird over it. I think for him it’s like, a conflation of extra marital affairs with sexual abuse, and then very likely conflating bottoming with sexual abuse as well. Both Baelor and Maekar are dutiful sons however, and all four (parents and sons) live long enough that I think Daeron might take a Corlys stance of like “well he did what i told him to do so what more can I ask” eventually but I think it would be a long road of Baelor trying to truly convince his father that his attraction to men has nothing to do with any sort of abuse.