#so I went on a bit of a tangent

[psychabolition]

@schizoprophecy

I'm critiquing the biomedical model here (=>which says that mental illness is the same as physical illness - thats why words like symptom and illness are used in clinical psychology) which is a specific framework that is used in psychology to think about mental distress/neurodiversity.

Not only has the biomedical never been proven to be true (=the chemical imbalance theory has been disproven several times for example), the model in itself is not logically coherent.

Your 'mental illness' can never "cause" anything because its solely a descriptive label (every psychologist will admit this !! - all diagnoses are just a list of descriptions of specific behaviors/experiences/ways of thinking), its never the reason for anything. I think we need to avoid the circular logic of "well i do x because i have y condition (which was diagnosed based on clinician observations of x) and my brain is simply broken in a way requiring me to submit to expert clinical management and surveillance". I think its highly misleading to talk about symptoms of an illness since saying 'I am suicidal because Im depressed' is the same as saying 'Im suicidal because Im suicidal'(remember: its only a descriptive label!!) - it doesnt explain anything. I think its really unhelpful and also simply not scientifically backed up to think about any experiences/struggles/distress that we have no matter how unusual/painful/norm deviation as an 'illness' of our minds/brains.

The biomedical model makes sense when you think about what we know happens societally to people who are labelled as mentally ill - it depoliticizes any and all suffering/mental distress caused by societal problems by blaming them on our brains/mind and telling us that we are at fault for responsible for our mental distress/pain and that we need to solve it for ourselves and work on feeling better on our own without any societal/communal change occuring.

It also justifies violence - like lets say we use the framework of the biomedical model to think about mental distress/suffering and say that (for example) a drug addicts brain/mind is at fault for their suffering and that this person needs to be saved from their own brain/mind that is making them think/feel/do things that are wrong and ill -namely taking drugs. This leads to psychologists doing everything to make them stop using drugs no matter how much autonomy they need to take away from the person to get them to stop using (isolating them, punishing them, shaming them, body strips, locking them up,...). If we dont see drug addiction as an illness but as a way of numbing pain/suffering we can actually start asking what is causing the suffering - is it homelessness?/social ostracization?/abuse?/patriarchal violence/... . And then the solution would be to try to built a better world with each other for each other so no one wants/needs to numb themselves every day anymore. Also mental illness labels are isolating and stigmatizing since we are told we and our experiences are inherently different from others and that only a qualified professional can help us - all while telling our friends who are not labelled as mentally ill that it could be dangerous not to call the cops on us since we might kill ourselves if they dont (all while institutionalizion increases the risk of suicide).

Now - since nothing is ever caused by a label that we get because we deviate from the norm (norm deviation includes suffering more extremely in our current society than others do) - our queerness can not be caused by our mental illness either. I'd even go a step further and say that all queerness is a deviation from neuronormativity(=whats societally deemed normal to think/feel/do bases on your assigned gender/age/socioeconomic status/...). And since neurodivergency is defined as "deviation from neuronormativity" I think that theres no clear line between what counts as neurodivergent and what counts as queer. I think its always wrong to call any experience/behavior/thoughts/mental distress 'ill/dysfunctional or crazy'. What is queerness if not a deviation from societal norms on how we're supposed to think/feel/act? What is neurodivergency, if not the same?

What if I told you that theres no progressive way to say that your or anyone elses queerness is a result of a mental disorder

[yoyo-s-coffee]

AY YO WHO THAT GUY

[batsplat]

It's a thing I already knew but all your beautiful analysis really made obvious (to me) how much of a grudge holder vale is. That man is never letting it go he's gonna hold his grudges into his grave

you know, I do think this is an interesting issue, because I'm not sure this is true of all his grudges. just sticking here with the grudges he accumulated in his capacity as a competitor, rather than just his general approach to life or whatever... how you judge this will kinda depend on how you feel about the 'reconciliation' he's experienced with some of his rivals - and whether you read the whole thing as sincere or not. now, personally I reckon he still dislikes biaggi, but also you are allowed to just dislike people so I'll give him a pass for that. some of the others, I'm a little more convinced by the whole reconciliation schtick

let's get valentino's take:

interesting that he mentions those three together, isn't it? and like, he's still not messaging biaggi or inviting him to his home - "even with max" kind of tells you all you need to know - but the other two? they said some proper nasty things to each other over the years!! I mean, the casey rivalry, there's some remarks from both sides where quite frankly I think I would struggle just a touch to get over it

I don't know, obviously this could all be pr stuff, but I kind of feel like... y'know, why bother? it's 2022, you're retired, who gives a fuck? sure it's a good look to be all magnanimous, sure it can be a bit of a way of twisting in the knife to the guys left in the cold, but also, who would care if you don't play nice? I think especially with jorge, you surely don't need to do all that, inviting him to your home and dancing with him... (which, again, some of the spats those two had...) and with the casey rivalry, if there's one guy who's still hung up about what happened between the pair of them, it's obviously casey (speaking of blokes who can hold a grudge). maybe this is giving valentino too much credit, but personally I buy it's more or less sincere. there's nothing to really indicate he's still particularly bothered by any of their past disagreements - he's basically going for the 'all's fair in love and motorcycle racing' approach. he knows he was an asshole, he accepts they were assholes too, whatever, that's how these things work. he's generally a fan of drama in rivalries, unsurprisingly, and he was happy enough to contribute his fair share - but he does see it as fundamentally being part of the game

to point out the obvious, check out who he's left out: sete and marc. that's where he can't let go of the grudges... because it's not about the offence itself as much as it is about the betrayal. this is the thing with valentino, right, it's about what kind of bond you had with him. if you weren't his friend in the first place and then piss him off as a rival then, y'know, whatever. obviously he's going to be vicious in trying to get back at you, but also he's really not going to waste his time feeling too aggrieved by it. I mean, think about how all the bullshit between him and casey dropped off sharply post-2012... from valentino's end anyway. think about how jorge and valentino pretty quickly got on again whenever they weren't fighting for supremacy within yamaha. they weren't friends in the first place, then they were enemies for competitive reasons for a while there, then it's over and valentino is basically happy enough to call it bygones

but... if it's a certain kind of bond you had with him and then you wrong him... that little mental list of all his past grievances, all your past transgressions, that's where it comes in. that's where he ices you out. denies you any emotional warmth. ensures that any interaction going forward is conducted entirely on his terms. where even any public 'reconciliation' won't truly be sincere.... or, certainly he's not going to forget what happened. if something else happens... it's like you've always got the potential of triggering this lingering resentment, in a way, where all that past stuff is still primed and ready to be called upon. he certainly doesn't just let it go

or, as he puts it in his autobiography:

Biaggi and I never talk to each other. I mean, we've never had a real conversation, anything that's lasted more than the requisite time to insult each other or put each other down, in the nastiest way possible. In any case, I don't hate him. It's true, we've never been friends, but hatred is something different, and that's too serious a word to describe our relationship. Far too serious. No, we have a reciprocal antipathy. No doubt this is a result of what we do for a living and the fact that we both want to win every single time. And perhaps it's also a function of the fact that we have very different personalities and very different ways of seeing things. Still, I don't think this means we hate each other, as some journalists have written. I think I could feel hatred for someone, but only for someone far worse than anything Biaggi has done. For example, if I were betrayed by a friend, then, yes, I could hate him. But Biaggi will never betray my friendship for the simple reason that we are not, and never have been, friends. Our relationship is very clear: we compete on the track - outside the track, each goes his own way. You could say we detest each other cordially.

... I mean. he said it, not me. and given this book was first published in '05... biaggi can't betray his friendship because they were never friends... I'm not saying he's thinking about sete, but it has to at least be a possibility, right? he's talking about one rivalry here and refusing to even mention the other... and the one he's refusing to mention is the one where he was friends with the other bloke. I don't know, maybe that's reading too much into it! and anyway, even if this passage wasn't really about sete, it's obviously still revealing. "detest each other cordially" is essentially what he was doing with casey and jorge (or from his point of view in any case, not entirely sure they'd agree with that). the grudge comes when he feels let down by you... and then, yes, he'll never let it go

of course, he's willing to set aside his grievances for a while if there's sufficient motivation for him to do so. in 2009, when he had so definitively won that rivalry with sete, why bother kicking up a fuss? in 2016, quite frankly it was just too much, and it was getting to the point where it was obviously hurting him too. on the one hand there was the media furore that had been going on non-stop since sepang, on the other hand it was also hurting his own approach to racing. there's reports from the time how visibly aggrieved he still was in the first few races of the season, and it took until they got back to europe for him to... y'know, have fun again. it's not sustainable to be walking around with a constant dark cloud over your head and broadcasting burning resentment towards your two main rivals. certainly not for someone like valentino - he needs to be having fun! the slight rapprochement needed to happen, in a way, because otherwise those years would have been even worse for everyone involved. but that doesn't actually translate to forgetting any of those grudges. this is about convenience more than anything else

goes to show, really... most of the time he doesn't take these things personally. I talked about it a bit in this post, how maybe it's also something that changed over time for him: the question of whether he was willing to develop these kinds of bonds in the first place with competitors... because he does possess a certain level of self-awareness in terms of what these kinds of rivalries are like and what they do to interpersonal relationships. ideally, you don't want to be hurt by a friend like that, right? better not to have that kind of emotional attachment with your competitors in the first place. how unfortunate it'd be if all those years after sete the circumstances aligned for him to see a competitor as something like a friend again... because, after all, those are the only people who could betray him. those are the only people where he thinks he could truly hate them

[turtleblogatlast]

People sleep on Leo’s ability to predict his family’s behaviors so in light of this consider him betting Donnie that Donnie can’t do something knowing full well that he could, simply because he’s bored and knows Donnie will get it done immediately out of pure spite and a need to prove Leo wrong.

He makes the bets with money he already won from Donnie previously but he’ll never admit to it, it’s too funny to.

[pynkhues]

https://www.tumblr.com/pynkhues/769329551222472704/im-a-canon-vers-loustat-believer-but-sometimes

This is a great point you make. In Paris Louis really is in a similar position to Lestat when he came to New Orleans. Louis is grieving Lestat, Lestat grieving Nicki. Both are protecting secrets about their pasts and looking for a way to keep living. I would even say that both are putting forth a bit of a performance with their new partners, though for different reasons. To some extent I even think Claudia has some parallels to Lestat in that way too. In trying to leave and escape her restrictive family life she ends up finding a companion that she gets to choose for herself. The cyclical themes are so fascinating

Thank you, and yeah, it's a really interesting parallel to think about. This feels a bit of a tangent, so please bear with me, haha, but I remember going to a lit event many years ago that had selected readings based around the theme of home, and in the introductory speech, the curator had said that they'd expected a lot of variation from the submissions to the theme, and there was in a lot of ways, and yet a central throughline appeared that home is a place you leave. It's something I've thought about so much over the years, especially as I live in a different state from the one I grew up in now, and it was one I thought about a bit while watching s2.

It's really interesting to look at in that context of the unholy family because as you said, there is this drive to escape home for both Lestat and Claudia (and Gabrielle) that Louis just doesn't really have. I think you feel that in what they do to escape these places that they're from, but I think the show also underscores that really in what a homecoming means for the three of them.

Claudia experiences her home in Rue Royale as a place of powerlessness and volatilty that can lead to violence, and returning to it steps her straight back into that ten-fold, just as Lestat experiences his home in France as a place of abuse, loss, and violations of his agency and autonomy, which he experiences again, ten-fold, at the trial in Paris, and for Louis, New Orleans has always been, despite everything else, the place where he had a family who he loved, and so of course he goes back and finds the only family he has left - his husband and the ghost of his daughter - there waiting for him.

It's tragic in a lot of ways, because I think there's this sense thematically in the show that the place you're from can change, but it probably won't change for you, no matter how many years you're gone, or the circumstances in which you return to it. Home is a place you leave, and how it held you when it had you will always be the arms you find yourself in when you're back in reaching distance, for better or for worse.

[basketobread]

Has Lunara gotten the Wyll dance scene yet? It just happened to me and she was my first thought. I imagined her coming around the corner with some bread in her mouth or something and stumbling upon his little ballet routine, and hes just like "oh hey" like it wasn't super obviously intentional. But she's so overcome with social anxiety that she just starts staring at ants or something. Meanwhile, Wyll is just like 😑

SIAHAIDSUHDSIDA NOT YET!! she's still in act 1 so we're gonna have to get her to act 2 for that one. BUT YOU'RE SO RIGHT SHE WOULD JUST STARE AT HIM WITH THE BIG OL EYES... fun fact: even though lunara INSISTS on traveling with ONLY WOMEN!!! she likes to keep wyll around cuz she thinks hes just the sweetest dude ever and if i could, i wouldve added him to the team but the party limit is 4 </3

[pyro-madder]

wanting to show wholesome interactions between the hunter and various npcs vs wanting to stick to canon writing (nobody gives a shit about you)

Like... the Doll is "preset" to care for any dreaming hunter. Gehrman is introduced as your guide but after telling you the basics, only directs you towards optional stuff (the sheer betrayal i felt upon realizing that lmao) and fucks off to take a sad little nap for the rest of the game. I thought it'd be funny if, being part of your subconscious, you'd hear his voice in your thoughts sometimes à la Cruller in Psych0nauts - but also, you're just another hunter to him.

A few citizens are openly nice to you without ulterior motives, and most of them are outcasts like you ; Gilbert who's a fellow outsider, the Dweller ostracized for his disability (edit : his general appearance moreso and possibly his link to an abandoned place of worship as a whole), and Arianna who deals with the general stigma that comes with her profession (+ her link to Vilebloods, for those who Know). She and Adella are also grateful for you guiding them towards a safe place, nothing surprising.

Now for other hunters. I live for Gascoigne's friendly tag-along across Central Yharnam but agree with the hypothesis that it was cut to make the player feel more isolated and alone, and we know how it would end either way.

Then Djura. I raise an eyebrow whenever I see the term "befriend" for taking his deal ; yes, you'll pacify him and he'll give you cool stuff, but then will tell you to fuck off with no additional dialogue. I also wanna mention he doesn't sound the tiny bit surprised/betrayed if you break the deal, which says a lot ; to him too you are just another hunter and he knows how it usually goes with hunters. I could go on about Dju in particular but his detachment towards you is extremely understandable from his position in-game.

Eileen and Simon are recurrent encounters who are amiable by default, but even then running into them comes across as "oh hey you aren't dead yet, good for you lol" to me.

Alfred is... Alfred ? Also amiable by default, open to the point if feels out of place, and though he thanks you for getting him to the end of his questline he (supposedly) offs himself immediately afterwards, his obsession faith prevailing upon anything and anyone else. i'm at loss here sorry

This is non-exhaustive, we could speak of Valtr and Patches and Annalise and so on. but these were some characters I like to depict along the Hunter ; Gascoigne, Eileen and Djura as mentor figures, Alfred as a comrade, Simon as a companion in misery, and so on - stuff you can expect in my fanart basically - while still meeting the fate they meet in-game (except dju who's just chilling if you don't go out of your way to make it otherwise).

But in-game, you have no name that matters, and almost no ones gives you their name either, you only know them from item descriptions when it's not from a boss' health bar. You're all strangers to one another fighting and surviving from the same mess, and you - Good Hunter - are the latest wedge thrown in the gears, with no previous connection to anyone like the different members of the many factions you meet in the giant chessboard that is Yharnam and its surroundings. Still, you get those small moments of respite, and they're enough to hurt when they're taken away, sometimes by your own hand in a final act of mercy, no matter how predictable the end becomes.

[musicalsiphonophore]

my workload this year is absolutely absurd (1.5x as much hw time as class time in maths, and since it’s double maths i have 8hrs of lessons weekly so that is A Lot, and probs as much hw time as class time in french and bio, but then i put extra time into bio myself). so i would expect to be deeply unhappy about this. but i’m not and i’m actually quite enjoying it. which is odd.

i guess it makes sense though. it has always been that in my spare time, i work on my hyperfixationy stuff, making notes on random crap or working on flute; i have never done nonworking free time stuff like watching tv (except going on tumblr ofc). and now a good half-odd of my school work is hyperfixation stuff. so i am, strangely enough, thriving under these conditions

[candyredappledragon]

Does Furret participate in Pokémon battles or are they moral support?

both actually! furret is a support pokemon! he has a moveset to help others and- ah sorry i got a "little" into competitive but you know for fun! florian inspired me to make a team that involves with pokemon i love and build it from there. though furret prefers to be my moral support. i grab him, hug him tight and i forget about my loss.

though some of my pokemon do enjoy the quiet and relaxing life so its a win-win for us! i leave some of them with my grandparents to help them around the house or do activities. i am very grateful for them!

[littlekingbergara]

Having some “Ryan & Shane aren’t really friends” demons which I know is stupid and parasocial and like not born out by the literally all the evidence that we have but I can’t help it sometimes. 😭 I just rly love their dynamic on screen, I hope it’s similar off screen.

oh those ARE demons!! they are Best Friends!!! a huge reason their onscreen dynamic is the way it is is Because they're Like That offscreen. you can fake a lot while making content but the kind of easy chemistry they have and the way they joke with and poke fun at and just talk to each other... you Cannot fake that. AND what we see is most often a Toned Down version of who they are off camera so i have to believe the bestieism is even more than we know.

also the first mystery files debrief when ryan legitimately could not think of Anyone he would be able trust on a bank heist Except For Shane. like yeah that was a jokey scenario but it means something that he believes shane is the Only person he can trust would not turn on him in a high stakes situation. like... ryan threatened to kill shane earlier in the episode he Did Not need to turn around and be that sincere. that's real.

ALSO also reading the interviews they did for ghost files and mystery files and seeing them in other people's content (shoutout my fav trypod episode) it's soo clear in the way they speak to and about each other that they really do love each other and working with each other and they make each other better creators.

and! shane was in ryan's wedding!!! his wedding that yes was published in a magazine but was not publicized in a way that matters for their brand. if they were just trying to push some fake friendship image they Absolutely would have taken advantage of that.

[shame-kink]

people who characterize marcille as ‘oh that lesbian elf motivated so much by how she wants to bang her s/o’ literally don’t get it. a marcille who KNOWS shes a lesbian would be on a whole ‘nother level of “annoying about it.” insert joke about gay being a characters only trait level annoying. she still writes off her gay shit as gender envy, protectiveness, or solidarity. once she realizes , its all over. shes going to be getting into harmful intra/ter-community discourse on twitter before collapsing into a years-long disillusionment wreckage as all her online buddies either go entirely transmisogynistic or end up overcorrecting and becoming a different kinda queerscourse radical. she even takes the word ‘lesbian’ out of all her urls :-(. not because she isn’t one or its bad but bc its a painful reminder of a sense of pride that now exists only in memory. and eventually she changes it to FALINSC-💥

[averlym]

"oh my soul, is it here? or is it rotting somewhere with my head?"

[batsplat]

☕️ on marc/dani as teammates? bc so many ppl on here especially have such a simplified and maybe even rose-tinted view of their dynamic imo…..

hm yeah it's a tricky one because I do think there's a lot of genuine interpersonal fondness there that was forged in the aftermath of some equally genuine animosity. for me, it's that development that's particularly interesting... what I personally have always found the most appealing about this rivalry is just how ruthless marc as to someone he genuinely admired and considered one of his heroes or 'references'. like, I think it's a bit different from the dynamic with valentino because it's kind of... vale's the childhood hero vs dani as a rider who's ahead of you who you want to directly emulate in rising through the ranks. with valentino, marc didn't really think they'd ever be competing at the top of the sport because of how big the age gap was, but with dani? different story

which does affect the emotional approach, I reckon - you can admire them and still dream of beating them, you know? like, say you're fourteen years old in 2007 and are getting out your customised casey stoner voodoo doll while he's bitch slapping your two guys, what fantasies are you cooking up in your little brain about meeting your heroes? with valentino, it's probably him grinning at you while handing you your tenth consecutive motogp trophy and telling you how amazing you are... how you're his successor, the one carrying on his legacy... lots of daydreaming of him like, hyping you up after he's retired and calling you god's gift to motorcycle racing, etc etc. who knows, maybe marc was also fantasising about beating valentino in epic duels, but he wasn't really expecting to be fighting valentino, right? whereas with dani? oh yeah, marc might have thought he was great... but in an ideal world, he's ripping the crown off dani's head when dani's a three time defending motogp champion! so crucially marc wasn't blindsided by actually fighting him on-track, and was kinda more prepared for that to get ugly? dani acts as a 'direct' reference, where he's just a few years ahead and marc can see how it's done, basically. but what this still means... he'd admired this guy for years, he had posters of him and all that shit, but the moment they're direct competitors and teammates? all that is just... locked away. no interest no mercy, all he cares about is beating the guy. and marc did still talk about using dani as a reference point, about how much he'd learned from him... but of course that scary fast learning of his was all about beating dani

from dani's side... I'm glad he's gotten to a stage where he's at peace with his career, but. god, it must have been tough. at the end of 2012, he's the in-form rider - more so than jorge. he won six of the last eight races that year. incidentally, this is how jorge is talking before the 2013 season:

obviously, jorge is trying to fuck with dani here, but he's also not really wrong. all four of the aliens have got a lot going on early 2013, but if you had to point at the guy who is dealing with the most pressure? well, it's got to be dani, doesn't it. he was the one who still had something to prove in the premier class, who was now being thrown together with the super hyped rookie. this is how dani spoke about marc at the start of the year:

and here:

and then of course marc beat dani at qatar and then won at cota... granted, dani does a good job of keeping his head and regrouping for the next few races - but it was still an auspicious start, provoking a lot of discourse that wasn't particularly kind to dani. so in that first year, you've got all these different elements - you've got how marc is competing on-track, dani's injury, how marc is already attempting to assert himself within the team, how you've got the behind the scenes warfare between their two teams (again, see this article)... and then dani's issues with marc's actual riding (x, x). now, I think it's worth saying that aragon 2013 is not a case where marc has clearly fucked up. he makes a mistake, yes, but he couldn't have known the slight contact he made with dani would lead to that wire breaking and dani's highside. here's what dani said:

this is a case where different racing philosophies clash, right? what dani's saying is that what happened was a direct consequence of how marc approaches riding - that he's always flirting with contact and this time it finally went wrong. it's the kind of riding dani has consistently disliked, and it's something marc is the poster boy for. in this case, this crash essentially ends dani's title bid. he couldn't walk for three days afterwards. dani criticised race direction for choosing not to give marc a penalty (apart from the penalty points) - this was not something he just brushed off

and, look, you do have to bring it up... dani's experiences with sic will inevitably have influenced how he approached the marc rivalry. I mean, it kind of did for all of them - there's elements of that tragedy that will have bled into how valentino, jorge, dovi and dani reacted to marc. with casey, it's one of the reasons why marc never even had an on-track rivalry with him. now, obviously, dani had big, big issues with sic, a lot of tension including harsh comments in the press and refused handshakes and all of that, as a result of sic's very aggressive approaching to racing. dani was also the one who suffered the most as a direct result, in particular after the broken collarbone at le mans. he's spoken after sic's passing about his regret about how he handled that relationship... how it changed his approach to rivalries, that reminder that there might be things he'd never have the chance to fix

the other sic-related element is that of course, there were easy parallels to be drawn between him and marc, and his shadow did at times loom uncomfortably over debates over hard racing during that period. I think you can feel it most strongly in jorge's response to marc... the echoes of when jorge had gotten in a verbal clash with sic at one of the 2011 pressers and his frustration when his complaints were just laughed off by journalists:

this press conference was from the race before le mans, where sic was responsible for dani's broken collarbone. so if two years later, you've got marc publicly shrugging off jorge's complaints in an only slightly more respectful manner, how can you not be at least a little concerned? yes, marc did have a better feeling of where the limit was, he didn't really push things too far, but... this was still a very recent trauma for everyone and nobody knew how far marc would or wouldn't push it at the time. especially not after the kind of reputation he'd gotten himself in his 125cc/moto2 days. (though of course it's important to note that sic's death wasn't caused by his style of racing, and if anything he'd gotten more sensible in the latter stages of 2011). so the influence goes both ways, right? on the one hand, it all feels a bit too familiar, on the other... well, that's actually a reason why you probably don't want to be too harsh on this kid. because you never know

in the end, the tensest year of their teammate partnership was 2013 - because after that title was sealed marc had won. by the end of the year, it wasn't really dani's team any more. his internal position had already been de facto undermined by casey, but not to the same extent because casey wasn't really interested in playing these games - plus the end stretch of 2012 had definitely cemented dani's role in the team. I've already given most of my thoughts here about how marc takes control of that team, which inevitably touches on some of his nastier behaviour. lying about what parts suited him is the obvious example... he's a ruthless teammate, he openly admits to it. and obviously, dani wasn't always just fine with that. who would be? he's accepted that's part of who marc is as a competitor, and at the end of the day he also had to accept losing. sometimes you just gotta make your peace with a status quo, yeah? it's tricky to strike the balance between not losing the competitive edge and not letting losing to your young teammate year after year drive you insane... dani's always been quite good at focusing on himself, even if a lot of the time 'focusing on himself' involved 'recovering from some horrid injury'

so you know, it's nice that their relationship has gotten warmer since they've no longer been teammates, and for the most part they did keep things civil while they were directly working with each other. also, you do just get over things when you're no longer competing with someone... I've said this before, but there's really only a relatively small number of truly burnt bridges in the paddock ecosystem. thing is, it's quite impressive of dani to seemingly not hold any grudges over what marc did to him... but he easily could have, and it kinda would've been justifiable? it's also primarily down to dani that this teammate dynamic didn't get worse than it was... which, y'know, you can argue if that was the right or the wrong approach, but it also meant he increasingly had to accept a subordinate role within that team - become a non-problematic teammate that honda was happy to sign again. and then you've got marc, who spent years looking up to dani and then spent years being pretty vicious to him and never saw the slightest contradiction between those two things, because of course he didn't! and of course he still has some historical fondness for him as a result of once being his fan... which is an element that has gradually snuck to the foreground again after marc increasingly managed to dismiss dani as a competitive threat. overall, then, as teammates they had their early tensions, then they were 'reasonably friendly coworkers', now they get on quite well. over the course of his career, dani's hardly been immune to drama with other riders, but at the end of the day he's pretty feud-proof on the whole. what kind of a nutter would you have to be to start a feud with dani pedrosa, eh

[sargeantsarmy]

Crying because I saw someone(a h a ckearney shipper) say that Max seems manipulative towards Laura in the prologue and their relationship is toxic, but like, bro Laura getting with the guy that locked her up for two months and can brutally kill her with no hesitation ISN’T toxic????

[strike-9]

saw a post on here about making friends as an adult and i feel conflicted cuz like, overall i agree that all you have to do is get the courage to show up and get the ball rolling by talking to people/getting their numbers even if it feels cringe or 'wrong' to do so however i can't help but raise my eyebrow at the 'act like they're already your friend' part because some people lean way to into that to the point where they forget we're not actually friends yet which inevitably leads to them saying/doing something that's pretty out of line so like. yes put yourself out there, talk to them and get to know them but please remember that people need to actually like, warm up to each other which could take weeks of speaking to them regularly at minimum

[that-foul-legacy-lover]

Big sparkly mothman the beloved

*nods* yeah... you get it anon

big sparkly mothman who clings to you whenever you go outside together

big sparkly mothman who follows you around the house, chirping and tilting his head when you turn around

big sparkly mothman resting his head on your lap when you sit down, or plonking his chin onto your shoulder and tugging on your shirt until you give him scritches

big sparkly mothman leaning into your palm, letting out rumbling purrs as you press your thumb against the grooves in his mask-like face

big sparkly mothman curling around you in bed with sleepy grumbles

big sparkly mothman holding your hands so gently with his larger clawed ones, not wanting to cut your skin

big sparkly mothman brightening at the sight of you, wiggling his wing happily when you approach

big sparkly mothman, Foul Legacy, with so much love to give; so much love for you