#thanks for being nice anon

[sharonisthebettercarter]

no hate but i don’t think madelyn was actually written to be romantically interested in or even really attracted to homelander. she definitely groomed him and would actively take advantage of his vulnerability which still really doesn’t make her any better but yk

i get what you're sayin' sweetheart... don't worry, i'm not gonna blow up on you, you were polite and for that at least i can thank you<3

it's up to interpretation and i think most in fandom actually see it this way too, but for me?

ultimately, i don't think it matters cause she still fucked him up pretty bad.

to a degree, i actually think this makes it worse (albeit a different kind of worse... but certainly not any better for sure) because it would mean that she was consciously aware that she was manipulating and leading on a child and didn't actually care or give a shit about him as *a child*, or even want him as an adult.

grooming him was just a means to an end and there was no pedophilic disorder (yes this is a real thing, not all people with it are actual predators that harm anyone and they can get treated for it before they harm anyone just the same, altho research to help has unfortunately been minimal) of any kind to attribute her actions to. which probably means that in the end...

she didn't see him as human either. just as a weapon or tool or an animal to use as she saw fit and that's... that's um... it's a lot.

honestly the whole situation with madelyn made me super uncomfortable watching and later thinking back on it, i know the ship is great for some and they should be allowed to explore that to the heart's content, have at it y'all.

but it's super triggering for me and i just... i can't.

if i'm honest, it really makes me wanna cry or vomit or somethimes both. it is one of the darkest things that happens to homelander, and i feel like *the* thing that is most likely to be dismissed in fandom, *especially* by some of those that proudly proclaim to love him.

i would even wager it's possible that *this* particular trauma that stillwell gave him is *exactly* the trauma that stunted his growth. i think he's *stuck* at the specific age he met *madelyn* and started interacting with her as his attachment to her even after he killed her was...

and that could mean a number of things, including the possibility that *a lot* more happened than we actually know about (and i would not at all be surprised if they confirmed this later as it would explain... well, let's just say it'd bridge a few more things)

lots of people think their relationship went the furthest it had ever gone at the end of the first season, and that it's mostly just *homelander* being attached and weird, but his *attachment* always struck me as way *way* deeper and traumatic than that, and that mindset has always felt a very dismissive to me. i don't know if i believe that and i wouldn't be surprised if the story proved otherwise eventually.

also anon... you made me sad and now i'm sad :(((((((((((((((((((((((( if at least a bit calmer with my blood pressure gone down, so again thanks for being poiite ;) still sad tho :(((((((((((((

[benevolenterrancy]

hi!! I think your art is *so cool* o(≧∇≦o)

do you think you could draw more moshang? either post canon or that au you did last time?? (baby mobei has my heart and all I own)

(˵ •̀ ᴗ •́ ˵ ) oh! how about return to childhood—moshang flavor?

don't question this king, shang qinghua, he knows what he's about

[yviegenie]

Too soon to ask for another selfie?

As long as you don't mind that I'm not out of bed yet 😅😅

[demonstars]

this one anonnie?

SAPNAP: You're like an older brother to me george <3

GEORGE: Thank you (?)

[coldercreation]

latty being subby has me thinking of dom!isac in general and i wonder if he's ever dommed kit 🤔 ik their dynamic is more isac being bratty usually but i feel like kit being taken care of and also made to work for it could be hm. very interesting if you do have any thoughts on that skdhsk

(love your work btw i am hyped for the wip!)

I have TOO MANY thoughts actually ghghhh! This is something I've legit puzzled over before, it's a bit of a complex one so I haven't been sure how to include or test that sort of dynamic from them in any of the works.

Like, Isac the person could absolutely dom Kit the person, especially when Kit's in his mushy soft boy moods. However... I don't know if it'd work for them like that because of the instinctual side? I can't really see Kit's A letting go in that way, being the head of the pack and so in control and all that.

The most control Izzy has over Kit's A is probably during Kit's ruts (and maybe during Nathan's heats... hmmm...), but even then it's like... Kit's instincts knowing that if he pushes too much and fucks it up, then he risks Isac getting fed up and kicking him out? (Yes the instincts can kinda be manipulative lil dicks to get what they want lol)

On a regular day, all I can imagine is that Kit's instincts would just see it as a game; probably would let Izzy 'try' being the one in control (making Kit wait, not touch, tie him up, whatever Iz wants) but it'd just be more indulgent from Kit's A than anything? Isac could try his best to get a rise out of Kit's instincts, but I just see it turning around on Isac and make him the one who's frustrated instead. I feel like Kit's A would just wait Isac out, let him tire himself, and then just finish Izzy off once Iz's worked up O folds :')

Maybe if Kit's A is having an extra chill and lazy-tired day, they'd get pretty close to a place where Isac can feel like he had the upper hand through and through (even though they'd both still know that Kit's A just let him play).

But! Even if they didn't have that kind of instinct deep dom/sub dynamic, Kit absolutely still is Isac's baby and he gets babied and taken care of just as much as the others. Like, Isac will complain about forced cuddles from the As and Lit being too mushy, but he does love all the attention and gives it back in his own ways. (He'd probably get mad if they suddenly stopped pawing at him or trying to force him into daytime cuddles. He'd 100% demand to have all that back, just to then say no again when offered.) Also, Isac knows how soft and sensitive Kit the person can be, so even though he loves bullying and aggravating Kit and his A, he also knows when the softer touch is needed. Lad's a demon but he's a very emotionally intelligent demon. He also loves Kit to bits so, there's that too.

Like I said, it's a complex one. There's many possibilities with their dynamic, but it's not as clear-cut as with the others so I haven't gotten around writing anything for this yet.

The instincts stuff is always very clear in my head in the way it works for them, but I don't know how well I've managed to translate it into text, here or in the series, so I hope this all made sense?? :')

Do you guys have thoughts on this? Likeee d'you get what I mean with it not feeling as simple with Kizzy? I'd love to hear if you think there's a different way of looking at their dynamic that could work for this though! xx

[mohntilyet]

not to mention the entire antaam fleet like 😭 that was the PERFECT moment to show off what the lords could do!!! The antaam fucked over rivain, theyve been a thorn in the whole nations side for a long time now, they would not pass up a chance for payback via full scale naval warfare so that the veilguard can do what they need to!! Sure dreadnoughts are dangerous but at this point they probably have tricks up their sleeve, thats one of the few things they have!

also wouldn't it be personal because does solas not try to blow up kont-aar because he's trying to 5d chess tevinter and the qunari into destroying each other. like. i know technically this would not be incredible widespread news because the attack was stopped, but i don't think the wonderful citizens of kont-aar would have missed the tsunami that nearly hit them and the shockwave that actually hit them. rumors go around. and i assume irian/vadis tell varric. who i think would tell isabela. who would tell the group she leads. who would care because ofc, they LIVE IN RIVAIN, and now know that solas and his followers thinks they can trade rivaini lives* to further his plans.

*while i also think there's probably a divide between kont-aar and the rest of the nation, it's one that the rivaini love to jump across and back over. an interesting comparison to be made here with most of rivain having similar sentiments towards dairsmuid and the chantry. like this is the country specifically mentioned to have a lot of citizens who follow the qun/are non-andrastian + it being MUCH more multicultural and accepting than other nations. any attack on rivain, even if it's a qunari settlement, would fan a lot of flames that solas cannot put out so the idea of trying to him taking multiple steps back because he didn't realise how intensely the qun/rivaini/lords would react is very fun for me. it would have been soo interesting for rivain to be a hub for efforts against solas because of how it's not influenced by andrastianism, how he (or his agents) specifically fucked them over, and (maddeningly for solas) also part of this resistance has spirits who willingly guide them against him. this could have even been a plot device where the door goes both ways and solas finds out rook's plans because he manages to eavesdrop through a seer or something.

and on the spirits. all the stuff where the mourn watch regularly communicates with spirits could have been done with rivain as well, and with different takes on being 'friendly' with spirits. iirc there's a spirit in the hall of valor which is so interesting but it's literally just there for flavour text. THERE'S A SPIRIT IN THE HALL OF VALOR THAT DOES NOTHING BESIDES LIKE. SAY HI. ??? bioware i would have liked to see more spirits and seers and the matriarchal pantheists you have talked about please. and also the idea of the peaceful qunari settlement being pushed to protect the country they are part of and what that means for them as qunari vs. rivaini. taash's storyline could have contributed to this . so A LOT less about choosing a side, more about how kont-aar has developed, changed, how rivain has influenced it and what it means to be qunari. not the qunari agents and fighters that we have seen, but their 'civillian' way of life in kont-aar.

complete waste not seeing any of established lore reflected in the lords of fortune or rivain because i stupidly actually thought we were going to see some kind of settlement and be introduced to a very different cultural norms.. in my beautiful mind i like to think taash is a little taken aback by how badly mages/elves/etc are treated. like they understood it was different outside of rivain (they would have been young when the dairsmuid circle annulment happened right? so they don't 'remember' it themself, they likely heard others talking about it when they're old enough to understand) but until they actually saw what was happening first hand, they had a weird dissonance about it. but what we got was a deserted beach, ties to another faction (wardens are fine!! they are great !!!! the fourth blight is interesting!!!! yet they are not the faction with a lack of info about them!!!!!) and also the hall of valor that exists as flavor text with nothing meaningful behind it besides a pub used in a few cutscenes and a minigame.

[somegrumpynerd]

Poor angsty lil oreo 😟 maybe he could need a reboop of his installment... or preferably a nice comforting hug from New Rat friend?? UwU seriously, would be sooo cute omg! 2 cuties hugging it out is just soo awww~ pls?? ✨🥺🙏

- 🍓

Well, the rat is me (hello!), so I guess I could give Cross a hug if he needs!

But he should be warned, I am a bear hugger >:3c

And while I'm here hugging skeletons, if I could be serious for just a second (because any longer and I'll die of sillyness deficiency)

This is the anniversary of a really sad day for me, and if I hadn't had undertale to be obsessed with and distract myself I can't imagine how much worse it would have been. So I just wanted to say thank you for letting me jump into the fandom and make stuff and have fun, it really means a lot <3

[jayjay-thejet-plane]

Heyy I'm the "why are all the good supernatural artists terrible people" guy. My point was, your art is genuinely amazing and I love how you draw characters and use colors ect ect, excepttt the fact you like incest. like actually what the fuck it's like a punch to the gut

What a lovely compliment fr, thank you!

I like sam and dean’s relationship specifically… its not like i like irl incest🤨

I was a bit of an anti once… and then neutral, but ive realized its all a bit silly

Do you truly believe every person who has ever made a film, written a book, or made art that includes illegal stuff (murder, incest, noncon, torture, cannibalism, underage, blackmail, physical assault, robbery, cheating etc. (the list goes on)) is a terrible person?🤔

People portray fictional characters doing sketchy shit all the time, we generally dont assume they think its chill to do irl… nor do we think they are bad people for liking to make horror movies for example

I promise you that horror film makers genuinely enjoy making fucked up gory shit, so why cant i enjoy drawing some fictional brothers making out? Do you think incest is worse than torture and murder🤨 i personally would rather some siblings fuck each other irl than people get tortured irl but maybe thats just me

Obviously you dont have to like my wincest art, if it gives you the ick thats totally fair! I get the ick from plenty of things myself. But maybe dont base your judgement of others/morals on your ick response…

Live and let live💙

[cultivating-wildflowers]

hi there !! i was over here because you had reblogged a really pretty photograph a while ago and i wanted to see what other lovely posts you might've found in the corners of tumblr.

i looked at your account and noticed, oh, pro-life! i was a bit wary at first because many people i've seen as pro-life are misogynistic sexist idiots who say it's a woman's fault if she's raped, even if the 'woman' in question is a fourteen year old girl. i hope you forgive my initial scepticism.

however, i read your post on the pro-life argument with the way you see it (it may have been a reblog of someone else? i can't quite remember) and i have some questions. i myself am pro-abortion, but with certain restrictions (mainly the current law in many places of you can't abort the child a month before birth because it's a human, and that aborting a child for its disabilities isn't ethical in the slightest).

what about when a twelve year old child is raped? is she meant to carry the strain of a child, scorn from parents, lack of support, blame, maybe have permanent harm or disabilities from childbirth? i have an old friend who got her menstrual cycle at eight years old. if she were raped, would she need to carry the child? in my worldview, no. a child gets raped and then the next day the "morning after" pill is administered so an elementary schooler (or middle, or even high schooler) does not have to suffer.

another question: sometimes, conception happens hours or even days after the actual ejaculation. would a "morning after" pill be outlawed? because there's no way to be sure if conception has actually happened, and if it hasn't, then taking a pill or some other action to prevent conception from happening in the first place isn't "bad".

and what about women whose children died in the womb? would anti-abortion laws still apply, would she charged with murder?

what about women who due to an illness or some other reason cannot have a child because they will die in the process, killing them and the child? would the pro-life worldview condemn both lives, or would they allow this person to take a pill and cut off the few cells that could not in any world be called a human?

if some vile person killed a woman who had conceived two days prior, would they be charged with double murder for that which is not yet a blastocyst (the zygote phase is four to five days after conception).

i'm very sorry if these questions seem accusatory or rude-- i'm genuinely trying to understand the other side, because i don't feel like i can actually justify abortion if i don't know how the "other" side would approach ethical questions. i put "other" in quotation marks because while we have two very much opposing sets of ideas on how abortion should be approached, above all we care for the welfare of people and want the best for everyone.

so sorry for putting this big chunk of text in your askbox, and feel free to ignore it, but you're one of the first genuinely nice people i've seen that is pro life who isn't trying to justify arguments with religion (because separation of church and state means no religion as sole justification for law, which is what many people i've seen try to do)

thank you!!

Hello! Thank you so much for your detailed questions! I'm happy to answer as best I can. I had thought this might take a while to answer, because I had to find a few resources I knew I had linked somewhere that helped me as I was sorting through the logistics of my own convictions surrounding being pro-life. Turns out this was how I'd spend my evening, lol.

I still have gaps and I'm always happy for civil discussion. (As you know, a lot of my thoughts are under my pro-life tag. Apologies in advance that several of my links just shoot back to posts I've reblogged, but they're more comprehensive than a single webpage. I can also direct you to a couple of tumblr folks I follow who have even more resources and cover different facets of the issue than I usually reblog or that I'm still investigating.)

As you might have guessed, this got long, so I'm tucking it under a read-more. But before I do, here is my most important resource: What actually happens during an abortion. I rarely say anything is so important that everyone needs to see it. This is one of those times.

i was over here because you had reblogged a really pretty photograph a while ago and i wanted to see what other lovely posts you might've found in the corners of tumblr.

The funny thing is that used to be 90% of my blog until like two years ago, and now here we are 😅 (I lost a lot of followers when I started actually using this like a blog. I also found a lot of great friends.)

i looked at your account and noticed, oh, pro-life! i was a bit wary at first because many people i've seen as pro-life are misogynistic sexist idiots who say it's a woman's fault if she's raped, even if the 'woman' in question is a fourteen year old girl. i hope you forgive my initial scepticism.

Yeah, can't say I'd care to associate with those people, either, and I'd love to challenge them on their own convictions (only, 1. I'm not really one for heated debates and 2. I'm pretty sure I, a single 20-something woman, would be immediately ignored, so why waste my time).

however, i read your post on the pro-life argument with the way you see it (it may have been a reblog of someone else? i can't quite remember) and i have some questions. i myself am pro-abortion, but with certain restrictions (mainly the current law in many places of you can't abort the child a month before birth because it's a human, and that aborting a child for its disabilities isn't ethical in the slightest).

While I was born and raised in a pro-life family, being pro-life as an adult is a conviction I claim and have searched out for myself. I know, and science affirms, that life begins at conception. (Yes, all of those frozen embryos stored at ivf clinics are unique and full human beings. I'll be so honest with you and say even I have to grapple with that and no, I haven't begun to grasp the implications.) Every single human being is deserving of dignity, from womb to tomb. It is never permissible to murder a human being for being inconvenient. (Canadian and British government healthcare systems, I'm looking at you. Also, Iceland, I see your claim that you've eradicated Down syndrome and I know you're a bunch of lying cowards.) It is never permissible to murder someone because they have the potential to be inconvenient. I could be hit by a car tomorrow and end up with brain damage. I could lose my job and plunge into horrible poverty. I could meet some random guy and end up in an abusive relationship. If it's not ok to kill me because of less-than-ideal circumstances, it is not ok to kill a child because they might be born disabled, or into a poor family, or into an abusive situation. We need to fix their circumstances, not kill them.

(Before I get much further, this post is a collection of a lot of my favorite resources on the impact abortion has on women. More facts and figures here. Unfortunately I cannot find the link to the study, but I have seen it cited often on here that a large majority of women who considered abortion but did not go through with it, within five years, are glad they didn't get an abortion. I believe the number is between 90 and 95% but again, can't find the link.)

For the last eight years, I've worked at an organization that provides care for individuals with disabilities, many of whom have the sort of disabilities that would make doctors suggest abortion. Not one of those human beings would be better off dead. The world is richer for them being in it, and I'm happy to know them. They deserve support and dignity, not death.

There is no magical point at which a preborn baby becomes human or becomes a person. They are human from the moment of conception. I have a friend who was born nearly two months prematurely; did she have to wait a month post-birth to be considered human?

There are also no non-person humans. Personhood is not merit-based. Again, if I end up with brain damage and have to rely on other people for the rest of my life, do I cease to be a person?

what about when a twelve year old child is raped? is she meant to carry the strain of a child, scorn from parents, lack of support, blame, maybe have permanent harm or disabilities from childbirth? i have an old friend who got her menstrual cycle at eight years old. if she were raped, would she need to carry the child? in my worldview, no. a child gets raped and then the next day the "morning after" pill is administered so an elementary schooler (or middle, or even high schooler) does not have to suffer.

It is a fact that abortion protects abusers. It is a fact that rapists and sex traffickers force women to have abortions to keep them in those horrible situations. Abortion is anti-woman, because it helps horrible men dodge all responsibility, and it prevents society at large from having to address the actual causes that often drive women to abortion.

Rape accounts for about 1% of all abortions. I'm not saying that makes it ok and I'm not trying to dismiss it, I'm just observing that it's nearly always treated as the main driver behind abortion when it is not. What it is is one of the most horrific things that can ever happen to a person, and the offender needs to be dealt with, with extreme prejudice. Killing a child helps no one. The mother deserves protection, she deserves support, and she deserves medical care. I don't know all the ins and outs of how best to handle this situation, but I believe the best case scenario is eventually a c-section. (A book I really appreciated that covered a situation like this is I Am the Exception by Anna Richey [video linked]). There are countless testimonies of women who were in this situation who chose to save their children and they are glad they did. They know the answer was not to kill children. There are countless testimonies of people who were conceived in rape who are glad their mothers chose to give them a chance at life. They know their lives have value and are worth living. Mother and child are both victims who deserve justice, not trauma heaped upon trauma.

(There's a whole discussion to be had here around child marriage and sexual abuse but unfortunately I don't have the material to even touch it. I can say making pedophilia a protected "identity" is so far off the mark that the radar can't even pick it up.)

(I will briefly sidebar to wave at the legislation being put into place to teach human development in schools via the Baby Olivia...project? [I forget what the whole initiative is called which is horrible because I've seen it around a lot lately.] I think that's actually pretty awesome. Kid-me would have been fascinated [and a bit grossed out because yeah, I was an awkward kid].)

another question: sometimes, conception happens hours or even days after the actual ejaculation. would a "morning after" pill be outlawed? because there's no way to be sure if conception has actually happened, and if it hasn't, then taking a pill or some other action to prevent conception from happening in the first place isn't "bad".

I have to disagree there. It's still bad. Especially because, in the overwhelming majority of cases, we're talking about sex between two consenting adults who are looking to disrupt a natural process and divorce it from all natural responsibility for the sake of convenience. If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex. If you don't want to have a kid with that person, don't have sex with them. Simple as. Biological children are not a human right, and neither is sex.

(If you poke around at enough of my blog you'll notice I'm straight-up against birth control. For one thing, it is extremely harmful to women; for another, it is a band-aid that has completely stalled the improvement of women's healthcare; for another, it is seriously damaging the average Western woman's understanding of her own body and biology; and there's the whole disrupting-a-natural-process bit. But I digress.)

and what about women whose children died in the womb? would anti-abortion laws still apply, would she charged with murder?

Reading any of the laws in question shows that ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages aren't at all included in those laws. Those are not abortion because the pregnancy is nonviable and it has become a medical situation. Abortion wouldn't even help those situations; if anything, it would only make everything worse, and risk the life of the mother. Abortion is not medical care. Ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages have to be treated medically. All of the cases I've seen where "a woman was charged with murder for miscarriage" end up being something else like "woman miscarried and tried flushing her baby down the toilet" (yeah that was an actual thing in the last month and she was charged with improper treatment of human remains which... = human dignity.)

what about women who due to an illness or some other reason cannot have a child because they will die in the process, killing them and the child? would the pro-life worldview condemn both lives, or would they allow this person to take a pill and cut off the few cells that could not in any world be called a human?

Abortion is not healthcare. If a woman is already at risk of complications, abortion will only make those complications worse. They will not help her. There is not a single situation where pregnancy is so dangerous that the only answer is abortion.

Those "few cells" are human. I'm also a clump of cells; I'm human. If I'm drowning (unlikely because I avoid swimming because I suck at it), is it ok for the lifeguard to hold my head underwater instead of making me calm down so they can tow me to shore?

Any reasonable human being who recognizes that the woman in question is carrying another human being, her child, would recognize that what they both need is medical care. The mother can be monitored, her condition treated as best as possible, and there's always the option to deliver early. Modern medicine allows us to support babies who are almost as early as 20 weeks premature! The answer is to take care of these people, not kill one because the other is in danger.

And in case anyone is wondering, this goes for babies who are "incompatible with life". 1. Doctors make mistakes and it's proven they often make mistakes where fetal development is concerned. (My sister got the scare of her life when a stupid tech told her that her third baby had "spots on her brain". I told my coworker, who said the same thing happened to her 15 years ago and one doctor bandied about the word "abortion" in front of her. Friends, the baby's brain was still developing. My sister's child is fine, and stupidly adorable to boot. Please.) 2. Even if that baby is "incompatible with life", the answer is not to kill them more quickly (and far, far, far more painfully). The answer is to treat them as best as medically possible, support their parents, and afford them the dignity deserving to every human being. Palliative care is a thing. For heaven's sake, let's use it more.

(My mother used to be a volunteer photographer for an organization where she went to hospitals and took pictures of babies who either had just passed or who didn't have long to live, to give their parents something to remember their children by. I also have so so many relatives and friends who have suffered miscarriages and stillbirths. I don't know that grief firsthand, but I know what it looks like, and I know that parents and siblings need support, not murder.)

(We also really need to stop treating all pregnancies like medical situations or a disease. They aren't. Pregnancy is natural. It is only when there are complications that it becomes a medical issue. I love modern medicine by and large. I love that it can help improve our lives. But sometimes doctors need to butt out and let women do what they were built to do.)

if some vile person killed a woman who had conceived two days prior, would they be charged with double murder for that which is not yet a blastocyst (the zygote phase is four to five days after conception).

I don't know all of the legalities of double homicides in the case of pregnancy. I'm fairly certain that if it is known that the woman is pregnant, regardless of whether or not that motivated the murder, then the charge is double homicide. I would assume if the pregnancy was unknown, it doesn't apply? (I watch too many murder mystery and police procedural shows to have any faith in how these things are determined.) Morally, two people have been killed regardless, but I have no idea on the legalities.

Also, note that zygote and blastocyst are stages of human development, same as embryo, fetus, newborn, infant, toddler, adolescent, and adult.

i'm very sorry if these questions seem accusatory or rude-- i'm genuinely trying to understand the other side, because i don't feel like i can actually justify abortion if i don't know how the "other" side would approach ethical questions. i put "other" in quotation marks because while we have two very much opposing sets of ideas on how abortion should be approached, above all we care for the welfare of people and want the best for everyone. so sorry for putting this big chunk of text in your askbox, and feel free to ignore it, but you're one of the first genuinely nice people i've seen that is pro life who isn't trying to justify arguments with religion (because separation of church and state means no religion as sole justification for law, which is what many people i've seen try to do)

I don't think any of this comes off as rude or argumentative in any way! You laid out every point very clearly and it's nice to be able to discuss it as clearly as I am able (which, admittedly, is sometimes as clear as milk) instead of feeling like I have to defend myself (usually in that case I just give up and delete the ask). Again, I'm happy to look into any of this further and to provide better resources if there's something lacking in any of my points. I'm by no means perfect, and my arguments, while driven by a deep-felt and sincere conviction, are not as thorough as perhaps they should be. That's on me to work on, but I'm happy to do my best in the meantime.

Part of my convictions are grounded in my belief in God, but as you are aware, they can't be my whole foundation, and if the person on the other side of the conversation doesn't share that belief, we need another point of common ground for our discussion. (Secular Prolife is an excellent resource if you want more in-depth, non-religious discussions of this topic. I know there are others, but I don't have the list in front of me.)

And it is important to explore all sides of the issue! It's kind of hard to argue coherently otherwise. I see this discussion all the time from people "on the other side" or on the fence, both people I know and total strangers. I'm familiar with a lot of their arguments, both the ones they consider good-faith and the ones that are obviously driven by vitriol. Listening to them only helps bring clarity to my own knowledge and convictions.

I know so many people who are "for abortion with exceptions" are sincerely motivated by concern for other people. The onus is on them to figure out why, for them, that means killing some people for the sake of others. It's not enough to say "Well, I've never been in that situation, so I don't have room to speak". Abortion is a human right's issue. We all have a place at the discussion. Because at the end of the day, it comes down to one thing:

Abortion is the intentional killing of a child, a human being. It doesn't matter the reason behind that killing, whether it's a question of health, social circumstance, situation in life, or fear. It is murder.

And it is never ok.

For further reading (the majority of these are actual links, not links to tumblr posts):

This post and the notes are my-go to for the breakdown of the key abortion arguments.

Choice42

Carrying To Term

New Wave Feminists

The Human Defense Initiative

Birthright International

Abortion73

Rehumanize International

And again, if you are looking for more nice and rational people who are willing to discuss things like adults, I can give you a list!

[jojacorp-official]

*grabbing you and shoving you into a pile of blankets while I comb your hair*

"I have work to do! I don't have time for this!!"

[novasintheroom]

Just wanted to come on here to say, you're on fire with writing Vash lately, it's amazing? It's a treat whenever I see your writings on the trigun x reader tag, and you make me pine for Vash for days. I hope that you're proud of 150 Bullets, because I think it's the best fanfic I've read in a while, I get so excited whenever I see it. One of those kinds of posts/pieces of writing where I wish I could like/kudos multiple times, I reread it like crazy. Anyways, I hope you're having a great day, and thank you for posting your writing for other Trigun fans to read! 🩷

Thank you sooooooo much for telling me this!!! I'm so happy you and others like 150 Bullets so much!!!! I try my best to make it realistic and relatable, so I'm glad you're liking it enough to reread it!!

I hope YOU 🫵 have THE best day ever!!

[charlotterenaissance]

im so sorry if this is rude, (or alr asked&answered), but may i ask why you are so team charlotte? dont get me wrong, i felt for her for most of the season, but i cant get over how she treated lewis and the girls after she became a mermaid. how can you support her after that? /gen

Not rude at all, anon! This was a really kind ask, I appreciate it 🥰

This is kind of a complicated answer, and this ended up being an essay, so for the sake of everyone’s dashes, I’ll put this under a cut.

I’d like to preface this with that these are just my opinions and how I view the show and how it comes across to me. I never hold it against anyone if they don’t like Charlotte for any reason. This is just my perception of the show and the characters.

Back in 2012, I did a rewatch of the show because I hadn’t seen it since I was a kid. I don’t remember how I felt about much of the show or even Charlotte in particular, I was more focused on how pretty the scenery was and the mermaidness of it all. But I hadn’t seen it in a while, I was about to graduate high school, and I was feeling nostalgic, so I decided to give it a another watch. I’d say it was around there that I started to notice some things that… didn’t quite sit right with me.

Now, I’m not ashamed to admit that a lot of my sympathy for Charlotte comes from the fact that I’ve been in her situation a lot: the one where you like someone and they don’t quite like you back the same way, but you’re too head over heels to care, and you’re willing to hurt yourself for the illusion. That’s where it started, but then I started looking at the season as a whole, with more of a storytelling eye.

I would like to preface this next part with a slight correction: I’m a Charlotte supporter, but I try not to make excuses for the more unforgivable things she does. She shouldn’t have bullied Cleo to the point she ran away, she shouldn’t have locked Emma and Cleo in the closet during the party, or stolen Lewis’s phone, to name a few things. Those are bad things she did, I’m not denying that or trying to handwave it away. However, I don’t consider her a villain or an abusive monster that most tend to. I approach the character of Charlotte Watsford by seeing the situation from her point of view, and realizing that what she does? It’s not dissimilar to what the other characters do, the only difference is that we give them the benefit of the doubt, or see things from their point of view, or realize that they’re teenagers, of course they’re not going to be making the best decisions.

And Charlotte Watsford does not get the same courtesy. No one seems to remember that this was a normal sixteen-year-old girl who didn’t have a clue about magic or mermaids, who fell a little too hard for a boy she didn’t pursue until she had the permission of his ex, who wanted to be the girls’ friend when she found out about the secret and was met with scorn and derision until she finally decided not to take it anymore. Did she make the wrong decisions? Yes. Did she do bad things? Yes. But her character goes deeper than that.

Anyone’s who’s followed me for a while knows that I will rant and rave about the Narrative of the show and that it seems to actively hate Charlotte while supporting the main characters. Why shouldn’t it? After all, Charlotte’s the designated antagonist of the season, of course we’re not going to like her. But what is it about her that incurs more rage than Dr. Denman, who just last season held four teenagers hostage for the sole reason of using one as leverage to make the other three let her experiment on them, or Sophie, who committed eco-terrorism and blew up a volcano after spending a season of scamming and lying to people? I really, really want to go with the answer that Charlotte is more rounded than any of the other “villains,” that Brittany Byrnes’ performance is just that memorable, that maybe it’s her connection to the other characters that makes her stick out more than anyone else. But while I think those are absolutely valid answers, I think there’s a little more to it. There’s something so malicious about the way the narrative treats her that’s hard to put a finger on, and it’s why I think she’s deserving of support and is more than the one-dimensional, man-stealing character that she gets stripped to, the kind of character that leads the actress to get hate mail to this day.

Charlotte does many bad things, I’m not denying it. She gets petty, she gets vindictive, she bullies the other girls from time to time. She lies and steals things. But one of the reasons I support her? It’s because so do the other characters, they just have the support of the narrative.

For example, in the first season, Zane stalks an old woman because he wants to know about some treasure that she says has and causes her to have a heart attack when he chases after her, and then, when Emma and Lewis show up and try to get her to help, he elects to stay behind and rob her houseboat while it sinks. He’s a bully to the girls whose prank on Cleo is the catalyst for the show. We explore his bad home life and his relationship with his abusive dad, and he gets to have a redemption arc and becomes a love interest for Rikki. Nate, his best friend, is constantly being gross and boundary-crossing to any girl on screen, physically attacks Lewis on more than one occasion, and is just a general creep, and no one barely says anything about it. Miriam is a semi-generic mean girl who barely does anything but get in the way occasionally. And these are just the side characters!

(I’m also tempted to explore how the male characters are sympathetic and get redemption arcs or rewards and the female characters are irredeemable, but that’s another topic for another time.)

Emma, Cleo, and Rikki aren’t much better than Charlotte when you really think about it. Cleo steals Charlotte’s diary and reads it, then confronts her in front of everyone. She barely apologizes and it’s more because she was wrong about what she was reading. There’s the infamous episode six where they all attack Annette and Charlotte, two women whose only crimes are, as far as they believe at the time, having romantic interests in people in their lives. They apologize to Annette, but only because they were wrong about her being on a date with Don. There’s the time that Emma and Rikki, in full mermaid form in public, play pranks on Lewis at the detriment of other people because, and let me check my notes here, Cleo was fired because of something she did and he was hired to fill that job. He is almost arrested because them doing all this caused a dolphin to escape and they barely apologize, in fact Rikki laughs off the idea of buying a replacement laptop (the reason he got the job).

Then there’s everything they did to Charlotte herself. Again, attacking her during their dinner because she dared to have a romantic interest in a boy she dumped and verbally said they were just friends when Charlotte asked if this was going to be a problem. They make snide comments to her all the time. I’m fairly certain Rikki tried hitting her with lightning during the camping episode, and while I’m on the subject of that episode, Lewis spits a drink all over her, and then laughs with the others about it! And they claim that the reason they do this is because they think Charlotte might be a mermaid now, but come on, if they really believed that, why would they risk an exposure like that? The answer is that they didn’t really think that, they just wanted an excuse to humiliate her.

Then! The second she is on an even keel with them, power-wise, that all stops, because now it’s a few episodes to the finale and we need a climactic ending, so now Charlotte becomes the most evil character you can imagine. It doesn’t matter that we’ve seen some twenty-odd episodes of three girls with superpowers use them against a normal girl whose sole weapon in her arsenal is being kinda mean to girls she does not care about unless her boyfriend is ignoring and ditching them for her. It’s okay when the main characters do it to the girl who is designated as the villain, but the villain can’t do it to them. Emma and Rikki can be in full mermaid form in public using their powers against someone for an imagined slight, but Charlotte can’t do the same thing to a person who just attacked their friend. Cleo can use her powers against people for no real reason except she’s mad at them, but Charlotte can’t make a mistake and use her powers to fend off an animal she’s afraid of.

There’s a subtle thing the show does that makes it easy to side with the main characters: no one holds them accountable, whereas with Charlotte, that’s all anyone does. Lewis half-heartedly says maybe they shouldn’t do things because it’s dangerous or wrong, but he’s just told to leave it alone or to shut up. Then when Charlotte becomes a mermaid, she tries her hardest to be nice and do everything to be their friend, but they just talk down to her and jump down her throat at every opportunity. Finally, in the last couple episodes, she just says enough and starts acting toward them like they’ve been acting to her. Which is bad. Because she’s… the bad guy.

And yet, I don’t hate Cleo, Emma, and Rikki for what they do, even as a Charlotte supporter. Cleo especially is going through a rough time that makes even the incredibly out of character things she does make sense. But why doesn’t Charlotte get the same curtesy? I don’t even mean in the fandom, but in the show itself. Why does everyone treat her like she’s out to get them, specifically? Charlotte doesn’t even care about them, or Mako, really, just in the sense of how it relates to Lewis and the grandmother she lost when she was a kid. It’s kinda funny, because even though Dr. Denman is never mentioned once after season one, you could write off their paranoia as part of being held hostage and almost used as a science experiment, which would be really interesting, if a little heavy for a kid’s show, if they explored that.

But it’s not, and, somehow, it’s Charlotte’s fault. It doesn’t matter if the show goes out its way to show how being ignored and ditched and lied to is obviously hurting her, because it’s not doing it out of being fair to her. It feels like a punishment, more than anything. Lewis can lie about spending time with his ex and straight up tell Charlotte to her face that he doesn’t have to tell her things if he doesn’t want to. The girls can attack her, and humiliate her, and laugh at her for having a silly fear. That’s fine, we can explain why they act like that. But we can also see things from Charlotte’s point of view too, even if the narrative doesn’t want us to.

I always say that if you don’t like Charlotte, that’s fine. I hope, and I am happy to see more often, people’s opinions of her change though, I’m not gonna lie, especially when I see her described as a needy, man-stealing abuser. That has never sat right with me, and I’m happy to go into that if anyone wants me to.

At the end of day, I find Charlotte a very tragic and fascinating character, one that I’ve dedicated a blog, multiple fanfics, and an essay I spent a week working on to exploring. I think there’s more to her than what I’m supposed to see her as, and more than one side to the whole situation, as I hope I’ve demonstrated above.

Thank you again for the kind ask, I really enjoyed responding 💚

[2aceofspades]

Happy New Years Ace!

Here's to more silly goon adventures and kindness in the coming year!

~-- --- .-. ... . / .- -. --- -.

Morse anon!!!

Happy New Year!

(It's sparkling cider I assure you as I am not a fan of alcohol bleh-)

Cheers to that for sure yes!! I am wishing you all the best in this new year 🙌✨ Thank you for being so lovely and sticking with me in these trenches, my dear morse anon. I appreciate you lots 🌟

[logicallyblind]

I think there’s something wrong with the fandom’s attitude if you can’t like post your “this is clearly an au I am making a fanfiction concept” without feeling like you have to apologize. Like what are you even apologizing for? Being a fan? Post your heart out let’s all think about how dick would treat little Jason if he interacted with him as 30ish year old NW instead of early 20’s

i’m gonna be so real with you anon this fandom slightly terrifies me lmfao i made a post a couple weeks back talking about an au i was thinking about and when i tell you i was getting full on death threats in my inbox because the characterisation wasn’t in line with the comics or fans just didn’t like the idea to the point where i just deleted it to avoid the trouble 💀💀 so now im just making SURE i make it clear it’s an au shdhdhd

glad you like the concept tho! i think the angsty opportunities post switch back would just be so good because it’s like dick realising just to which degree his relationship and dynamic with bruce effects the family at a greater scale than he’s first realised

but also the angst of jason seeing how dick had changed in the years since the others had joined and coming to the conclusion that dick cared enough about THEM to improve his relationship with bruce but not enough about Jason to do the same (and we’re working with an unreliable narrative here cause insecure 15 year olds do not have clarity of thought about a situation they’re in dhfhd)

and etc etc i might acc transfer my notes on this into another post soon if people are acc in any way interested in it tho!

[weheartstims]

Can i request a catnap stimboard from poppy playtime with gifs of furry paws,red gas/smoke and purple fur, please and thank you

Also i fucking ADORE your stimboards :3

Catnap (Poppy Playtime) with red smoke and purple fur and paws!

🟣|🐾|🟣 🐾|🟣|🐾 🟣|🐾|🟣

[ferrocyan]

what was dragonsong like for your wol? they were from ishgard, right?

HII ANON thank you this is a very good question. hmm in short it felt unfulfilling and empty, but a duty she chose to put to rest for other peoples sake. tart was born in the frontlines of the dragonsong war, in the dawn vigil, and furthering the war on that front was the campaign of the previous wol. in a way tarts role in this war as the next wol was meant to be something she inherited, but it was taken away before the sentiment could take root. she even ended up moving away from coerthas. so all throughout heavensward she was just looking at things that were supposed to be hers, this homeland, this war, and they dont.. feel like anything much at all.

the things that did feel like hers though are her calling as the warrior of light, to fight primals. her position in the scions beside alphinaud and tataru. haurchefant, her best friend. those were the only things that had meaning for tart, so she mostly acted in their interests. though her default belief aligns more with estinien, that the dravanians should be exterminated, she never rly acted on it when alphinaud wanted to sue for peace. and when she had misgivings about being involved w the high houses, well at least house fortemps had never done wrong by her, and she would do anything for haurchefant besides. so.. when he died. man. it all went to ashes. what was this all for again?

the one, like, shock to her system that woke her up was actually the falcons nest incident. get poisoned lmaooo like for a second tart got furious enough that someone almost made all that effort for peace go to waste, if she wasnt delirious she wouldve kicked that maids ass herself lol. honestly she was on emmanellains side (and more. to emmanellains horror. lmfao) well but then ishgard rly commits to ending the war and transitioning into peacetime so tart thought "alright there is nothing here for me anymore. this is no home of mine. goodbye" and went back to limsa. until the scions need her again, of course

honestly... if i were to replay hvw id maybe fantasia to miss former wol. i bet itll be so much more interesting and meaningful for her hahahah tart isnt as fun unfortunately