#that it’s possible to be mentally ill and a horrible person and that’s not demonizing mental illness that’s just being a person

[transmutationisms]

serious question but do you personally believe there is a way to approach psychiatry in a way that uplifts and upholds patient autonomy and wellness or is the entire trade essentially fucked haha. Btw this is an ask coming from a 3rd year med student—with a background of severe mental illness—who is considering a residency in psychiatry after receiving life-saving care in high school pertaining to said conditions. (I have peers who have been involuntarily hospitalized and treated horribly in psych wards, with approaches i patently disagree with, but was lucky not to experience. I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework. I also def agree with you that so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized—a great example being the whole “chemical imbalances in the brain is the ONLY reason why im like this” argument that ive unfortunately fallen hard for when i was younger and am still currently dismantling within myself…and like dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc). Like i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people—a lot of whom are just like me—but im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system, in ur opinion… ngghhhhhh i just want to be a good doctor to my patients…

(ps i love all ur writing and analysis on succession!! big fan mwah <333)

i don't mean to sound unduly pissy at you, specifically, but i do have to say: every single time i've talked about antipsych or broader criticism of medicine on this website, i immediately get a wave of responses like this, from doctors/nurses/psychs/students of the above, asking me to, like, reassure them that they're not doing something immoral or un-communist or whatever by having or pursuing these jobs. and it's honestly frustrating. why is it that these conversations get re-framed around this particular line of inquiry and medical ego-soothing? why is it that when i say "the medical encounter is not structured to protect patient autonomy or well-being," so many people hear something more along the lines of "doctors are mean and i wish they were nicer"? why is it that it's impossible to discuss the philosophical and structural violence of academic and clinical medicine without it becoming a referendum on the individual morality of doctors?

i'm choosing to read you in good faith because i think it's possible to re-re-frame this line of questioning to demonstrate to you the sorts of critiques and inquiries i find more interesting and more conducive to patient autonomy and liberation. so, let me pick apart a few lines of this ask.

"is the entire trade essentially fucked?"

if you're thinking of trying to 'reform' the project of medical psychology within existing infrastructures and institutions, then yeah, it's fucked. if you're still assuming that affective distress can only be 'treated' within this medical apparatus (despite, again, no psychiatric dx satisfying any pathologist's understanding of a 'disease' ie an aberration from 'normal' physiological functioning) then you're not challenging the things that actually make psychiatry violent. you're simply fantasising about making the violence nicer.

"I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework."

i hate when i talk about psychotropic drugs being marketed to patients using lies like the chemical imbalance myth, and then pushed on patients—including through outright force—by psychiatrists, and the discussion gets re-framed as one about 'overprescribing'. my problem is not with people taking drugs. i am, in fact, so pro-drugs that i think even the ones administered in a clinical setting sometimes have value. my issue is with, again, the provision of misleading or outright false information, the use of force and coercion to put patients on such drugs in order to force social conformity and employability, and the general model of medicine and medical psychology that assumes patients ought to be passive recipients of medical enlightenment rather than active participants in their own treatment who are given the agency to decide when and how to engage with any form of curative or meliorative intervention.

'holistic' medicine and psychiatry do not solve this problem! they are not a paradigm shift because they continue to locate expertise and epistemological authority with the credentialed physician, and to position patients as too sick, stupid, or helpless to do anything but receive and comply with the medical interventions. there are certainly psychotropic drugs that are demonstrably more harmful than others (antipsychotics, for example), and some that are demonstrably prescribed to patients who do not benefit from them and are even harmed by them. conversely, there are certainly forms of intervention besides pharmaceuticals that people may find helpful. but my general critique here is aimed less at haggling over specific methods of intervention, and more at the ideological and philosophical tenets of medicine that cause any interventions to be imposed by force or coercion on patients, then framed as being 'for their own good'. were suffering people given the information and autonomy to actually choose whether and how to engage in any kind of intervention, some might still choose drugs! my position here is not one of moralising drugs, but making the act of taking them one that is freely chosen and available as an option without relying on physician determination of a patient's interests over their own assessment of their needs and wants.

"so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized"

true, but don't misunderstand me as saying that drugs or any other form of intervention should be forcibly withheld from those who do want them and are made fully aware of what risks and harms seeking them could entail. again, this would still be an authoritarian model; my critique is aimed at increasing patient autonomy, not at creating equally authoritarian and empowered doctors who just have slightly different treatment philosophies.

"dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc"

ok, framing this as "demonisation" tells me that you're not understanding that, again, this is a systemic and structural critique. it is certainly true that a great many doctors currently are, and have historically have been, outright racist, trans/misogynist, ableist, and so on. framing this as a problem of a well-intentioned discipline being corrupted by some assholes is getting it backwards. medicine attracts prejudiced people, not to mention strengthens and promotes these prejudices in its entire training and practice infrastructures, because of its underlying philosophical orientation toward enforcing 'normality' as defined by 18th-century statistics and 19th-century human sciences that explicitly place white, cis, able-bodied european men as the normal ideal that everyone else is inferior to or failing to live up to. doctors who really nicely tell you that you're too fat are still using bmi charts that come from the statistical anthropometry of adolphe quételet and the flawed actuarial calculations of metlife insurance. doctors who really nicely deny you access to transition surgery are still operating under a paradigm that gives the practitioner authority over expressions and embodiments of gender. the issue isn't 'demonisation', it's that medicine and psychiatry explicitly attempt to render judgments about who and what is 'normal' and therefore socially 'healthy', and enforce those standards on patients. this is not a promotion of patient well-being, but of social conformity.

"i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people"

let me ask you a few questions. you say that you like your psych rotations... but how do your patients feel about them? is their autonomy protected? are they in treatment by free choice, and free to leave any time they wish? are they treated as human beings with full self-determination? if you witnessed a situation in which a patient was coerced or forced into a certain treatment, or in which you were not sure whether they were consenting with full knowledge or freedom, would you feel empowered to intervene? or would doing so threaten your career by exposing you to anger and retaliation from your higher-ups? what higher-ups will you be exposed to as a resident, and then as a practicing physician? could you practice in a way that committed fully, 100%, to patient autonomy if you were working at someone else's practice, or in a hospital or clinic? could you, according to current medical guidelines, even if you had your own practice?

when you say "this is the manner in which i would like to help people", what do you mean by "this"? can you define your philosophy of treatment, and the relationship and power dynamic you want to have with any future patients? is it one in which you hold authority over them and see yourself as determining what's in their 'best interests', even over their own expressed wishes? have you connected with patient advocates, psych survivors (other than your friends), and radical psychiatrists and anti-psychiatrists who may espouse heterodox treatment philosophies that you could consider? do you think such philosophies are sufficient for protecting patient autonomy and well-being, or are they still models that position the physician's judgment and authority over that of the patient?

"im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system"

and here is the crux of the problem with this entire ask. you are wondering how to sleep at night, if you are participating in a career you find morally distasteful. where, though, do your patients enter into that equation? do you worry about how they sleep at night, after having interacted with a system of social violence that may very well have traumatised them under the guise of providing help? why does your own guilty conscience worry you more than violations of your patients' bodies, minds, and basic self-determination?

i can't tell you whether your career path is morally acceptable to you. i don't think this type of guilt or self-flagellation is fruitful and i don't think it helps protect patients. i don't, frankly, have a handy roadmap sitting around for creating a new system of medicine and health care that rests on patient autonomy. affective distress is real, and is not something we should have to bear alone or with the risk of having violence inflicted upon us. what you need to ask yourself is: how does the medical model and establishment serve people experiencing such distress? how does it perpetuate violence against them? and how do you see yourself countering, or perpetuating, such violence as someone operating within this discipline? what would it mean to be a 'good' actor within a violent system, if you do indeed believe that such a thing is ontologically possible?

[nesiacha]

To put an end to the cliché of Simone Evrard’s jealousy towards Charlotte Corday (and at the same time the demonization of women concerning the assassination of Marat by Charlotte Corday):

In a horrible movie whose name I won’t mention (it's taboo, it never existed for me, ideally to preserve my mental health), Marat’s companion, Simone Evrard, is portrayed as a jealous woman, and, if possible, ugly, dressed in shabby clothing compared to the "magnificent Charlotte Corday." There’s no need to explain which side the film takes, not to mention that Marat torments Simone Evrard in the film (how horrible, considering that he was one of those revolutionaries fighting against domestic violence—he would have been furious at this depiction). Simone Evrard, a highly intelligent political figure, without whom Marat would have been far less effective, was considered a worthy figure by many revolutionaries. In short, the film is full of sexism and classism (because, of course, women who dress modestly must be depicted as evil compared to women who dress elegantly, even though Simone Evrard always dressed elegantly, according to Stefania Di Pasquale).

Anyway, here’s an excerpt from “La violence évitée : citoyens ordinaires face à l’assassinat de Marat” by Guillaume Mazeau. What made Simone Evrard (or her sister Catherine Evrard) suspicious of Charlotte Corday from the start wasn’t jealousy (and jealousy of what, anyway?) but her suspicious behavior: “The women around Marat scrutinized the intruder. Despite the neighborhood’s relative social mix, a woman of standing like Corday was certainly not part of the regular crowd and quickly drew attention. Her attire clashed with the modest clothing of the neighbors. Her demeanor gave her away: climbing and descending the stairs ‘too’ quickly, Corday disrupted the household’s usual pace. She immediately aroused suspicion. From sociability to politics, it’s just a small step: as a stranger, Corday was quickly viewed as suspicious.” So, as you can see, it wasn’t jealousy at all that made her suspicious. Marat should have listened to the women around him; he might never have been assassinated (yes, he would probably have died months later from illness, but honestly, he would have been more valuable alive than as a martyr).

By the way, even Marat’s enemies could visit him without any problem, so the idea that visitors were carefully selected to flatter him can be dismissed.

In fact, when Charlotte Corday killed Marat, it was a man, Laurent Le Bas, a commissioner who was helping with packaging, who first struck out at her. He grabbed a chair, hit Charlotte Corday, and continued beating her. Simone Evrard then joined him, as did Catherine Evrard. (Of course, I condemn all forms of lynching on principle, even against the most despicable people, but without excusing Simone Evrard, I think most of us would have done the same if one of our loved ones had just been murdered by this person). The insults thrown at Corday weren’t aimed at someone perceived as counter-revolutionary, but at someone seen as a murderer like Charlotte Corday.

Yet, it was a woman, Marie Barbe Aublain, the doorkeeper and a close person of Marat, who put an end to the violence against Charlotte Corday. She helped subdue Charlotte Corday and, without a word, acted as a mediator to ensure that Corday was handed over to the authorities.

So, there was no jealousy or pettiness from Marat’s female companions towards Charlotte Corday. In fact, it was a woman who saved Corday from being lynched, far from the image of bloodthirsty revolutionary women.

[katapotato55]

Undertale analysis: Chara was a bad person but not because they were an "evil serial killer child" like the fandom portrays.

TW: mentions of mental illness, self harm, and suicide. SPOILER FOR UNDERTALE. yes this game is 8 years old and scarily popular, but its still worth playing! its 10 bucks on steam! get it! Post also contains stupid edits I made to ENHANCE your experience by at least 50% guaranteed or your money back (post cost $0)

first: some backstory. I played Undertale way back in like, 2016 when the game was still fresh yet gaining popularity quickly. The fandom soon after became criminally insane and went on a moral panic where people were harassed for "playing the game wrong". I remember stories of youtubers cancelling Undertale let's plays because they would kill a character and people would get upset. other than AUs, the biggest thing that stuck out to me was the strange obsession with claiming Chara is an evil demon child who is the root of all evil and eats puppies and enjoys drinking the blood of the innocent. and then counter-culture made it so that chara is actually innocent and that the PLAYER is the horrible evil monster eating puppies etc etc.

two extremes that i half-agree with, but mostly disagree with. There was an INSANE black and white mentality that flooded the Undertale space with no breathing room for mistakes. nowadays people have matured and the fandom calmed down, so now would be a great time to explain why i think Chara is a more complex character than people give them credit for. please don't hurt me.

1- Chara very much had mental health issues.

and not in the horror movie way where they were a caraaazay evil serial murderer

a huge misconception is that people assumed the garden tools in toriel's house being dulled was somehow "proof" that Chara was an evil serial murder or something.

though... I think people also forget Chara heavily hinted at struggling with serious depression and misanthropic tendencies.

Chara climbed the mountain to end their own life. the reason the garden tools were dulled wasn't because the Dreemurs were trying to protect other people from Chara, they were trying to protect Chara from themself. it baffles me how a lot of people didn't catch onto that. It could be that we were young teens and didn't know better... but i digress! "but kat? how is Chara a bad person ? are you saying people with depression are-" get that objectively wrong idea out of your head. Having a mental illness does not make you a bad person. If you struggle with suicidal thoughts please get help from loved ones and don't EVER think you are a bad person for struggling. no. chara is a bad person because...

2- Chara was a bitter misanthrope that didn't care about anyone else or their feelings.

there are several lines of dialogue that point to the fact Chara did not like humans. There is a high probability that Chara had a hard home life before falling to the underground and that is possibly why Chara was the way they were. I am not going to send you a million screenshots as to every single bit of evidence of this, I am not made of time and jpegs. (besides i spent the entire budget on photoshop edits) I am however, going to send you the most damning evidence on my side: the true lab tapes. In the pacifist run, you can visit the true lab and find Asgore and Toriel's old home videos. The tapes basically showcase Chara's plan to Asriel where they were to eat the butterscotch flowers, and then Asriel will absorb their soul when they died.

you can watch this youtube video on all of the true lab tapes. to recap the story, Chara died, Asriel absorbed the soul, took Chara's body to the human village and then the humans thought Asriel killed Chara. Asriel refused to fight, walked back to their home and died in the flowerbed. Later on if you talk to Asriel, He mentions he wasn't the one who went to the human village, but it was Chara that was controlling him. He refused to hurt the humans and fight back and essentially they were both taken down. so here are my thoughts (please remember this is my interpretation you are OK to disagree with me)

-Chara probably just used the freedom of the monsters as an excuse to off themselves, Then put that emotional responsibility on Asriel. -They then USED Asriel's body to try and enact revenge on the humans in their death as some kind of messed up murder-suicide but in the wrong order -This ends up Killing Asriel, then he later became a bitter misanthropic husk after being reincarnated by Flowey. Possibly due to the trauma. -This ends up putting the ENTIRE underground in a depressed state with no hope and causing a massive war with the humans -their adopted parents are now divorced due to this tragedy and both Toriel and Asgore started to have conflicting issues on the topic of humans -Asgore basically trapping everyone with him in his own grief because he didn't want to actually face what happened and played the long game collecting souls one by one. -Toriel struggling to move on and essentially trying to mother any human that falls down without facing her demons. -Litterally all of undertale happened. essentially Chara was not a bad person because they were a child version of Jason Voorhees Chara was a bad person because they manipulated their family into having emotional responsibility for their self-inflicted death and hatred of humanity. They made their issues everyone else's problem and didn't consider how their horrible actions would affect others. and in a way, that is one of the morals of Undertale If you don't care about others and how your actions will affect others, then you would be making the world a shitty place in the end. Lets get back to that thing I said earlier about fans harassing other players for little mistakes. killed Toriel on your first play through ? congratulations! you are a horrible irredeemable person who deserves to get death threats ! /s God forbid we have nuance and acknowledge that most players at this point feel BAD about what happened since this is their first play through! And that they CARE about what they did to their new friend! These kind of people ignore the fact that the issue with the genocide run wasn't just the deaths, but that the player didn't consider how the monsters felt after you just ripped away their happy ending. which is the mentality that both Chara and Flowey had.

here is a video i recommend. to quote this video about the sans fight: "They call out the player not for acting immorally but for acting with no moral guidance whatsoever. Flipping back and forth between good and evil for no real reason except that they want to see what happens. In the boss’s own words, committing genocide “because you think you can, and because you can, you have to.” " Chara offed themself and made Asriel emotionally responsible for Chara's fucked up revenge fantasy without considering others feelings The player restarted the timeline (more than likely the good ending) to kill everyone all for the reason of curiosity without considering others feelings. the reason why Chara goes after you at the end of the genocide run is because you basically VALIDATED the deep dark desires of a mentally damaged person and made them watch their loved ones get ritualistically murdered. meanwhile in the pacifist run (with no history of the genocide path on your file), you simply let Chara remain as they were when they passed away. You didn't validate their dark mentally unstable desires, you simply shown Chara that the world isn't a horrible place and that actually caring about other people leads to a better life. If you HAVE played genocide before the pacifist ending, then the lesson does not sit because you still basically led them down a dark path in the end. By caring about how others feel and the impact you leave on people, you are helping retain hope for a better future for everyone, and that is one of the many reasons why i love Undertale.

thank you for reading this massively long analysis, it took me a lot of time and effort to get this put together.

[ms-all-sunday]

w7 robin is creepy. most creepy thing about her is how she refuses to react to any of it. like the most creepy reveal ive ever seen in anything is that robin doesnt even need to be put in seastone handcuffs to listen to the government. shes either completely nonreacting in a way that makes you feel intensely uncomfortable or reacting like she's seen a monster right in front of her that you cant see but shes convinced is there.

when i call robin creepy in water 7 im doing it with the knowledge shes coming off as creepy because she has personality disorders and ptsd, and shes in a triggering situation for her that is partially her fault and partially the governments, (like i genuinely think w7 is the best possible representation of being triggered ive ever seen, i really do fucking intensely relate to robin.)

i think the reason i feel so comfortable in calling her creepy on this blog despite the fact i have never been comfortable doing so in reference to any other character with that level of trauma is that the reason she's creepy in water 7 is not from a point of alienation?

i always used to think "having a mentally ill person be bad means they get nagito komaedaed" and what i meant by that is they get alienated from the narrative. its a thought i had specifically after seeing persona 5s akechi play out (that game should on paper be way more sympathetic and not alienating towards akechi than it is) and it was the best representation ive seen of someone being bad and mentally ill that i had seen up until that point, but he still gets nagito komaedaed.

as in, i feel he gets alienated from the audiences perspective and you are supposed to view him as a horror monster rather than a character. akechi is kind of like progressive nagito komaeda.

so when i call robin creepy, i mean that in the sense i don't think her perspective gets alienated from the audience. (in the nagito komaeda way) i think you're supposed to always view her as a friend and someone close to you. which i think is where the good horror comes from in regards to how she acts in water 7. you fundamentally couldn't have the horror of her situation impact you as much as it does in w7, without the understanding extended to her.

the story water 7 is about a lot of things, but most of them can be captured in "when mentally ill people do bad things because they're mentally ill" and i struggle really bad when i'm perceived as creepy or monstrous because of how i act in regards to my mental illness, being able to conceptualize someone seeing me as creepy even when they love me and are close to me or even because of it helps with that a lot. and there's naunce to it too, because in canon robin also has people perceiving her as a literal demon child and that from other people is coming from a horrible place.

this also leads me into how great of a title "demon child" is for her, because she allows herself to be defined by that trauma for the majority of her life and the title reflects that. both how she lets other people define her by it and herself.

[thenightling]

'Tis the season. So here's my warning.

The real danger of the Ouija board / Spirit Boards, automatic writing, or pendulums isn't the chance of contacting a demon but the ideomotor effect of tapping into your own subconscious and mistaking it as a spirit. That actually happens a LOT more than real spirit communication. (Note: I am not saying real spirit communication is impossible, mind you.)

This is why the board tells you what you want to hear or expect to hear.

"But the board told me really horrible things!"

Welcome to the dark side of your imagination.

"But I got a demon! I was scared of conjuring a demon! I didn't want a demon!"

You expected it on some level and maybe some bored part of your subconscious wanted the drama of needing your home saged by Auntie Bertha.

For more research I suggest looking up the Ideomotor Effect and cross reference "Facilitated communication, abuse case." (also called FC) In this instance someone used a Ouija board as a "tool" to communicate with a non-verbal disabled man and was convinced he was telling her things.

I know one person who used a pendulum and twice became convinced that her favorite Broadway actor was going to show up in his limo and drive her and her son away to his mansion where they'd live happily ever after as he was truly her soul mate and the spirit told her that he would come for her. (She had never met the man in question, she had just seen him in one play and several movies...)

At first I dismissed it as her joking around. but then she did it with me in a parked car and I could tell she was moving the pendulum but she didn't realize she was.

And when it started to say "(actor's name here) will..." I tried filling in the blank "Will walk again?" The actor had survived a stroke and seemed like a possible fill-in if she wasn't trying to make it say he was going to come for her and her son again.

She laughed and said I was being mean. (Why is suggesting a paralyzed man might walk again mean?)

And so it continued and started to say what I dreaded. To me this was the big clue that some part of her knew what she was having it say and yes, she was trying to get it to say that the actor she was obsessed with was going to come for her and her son.

This sort of thing is the real danger of Ouija boards / Spirit boards, automatic writing, and pendulums. If you have someone who accidentally induces the ideomotor effect, and especially if they are predisposed to mental illness.

The worst demons are already inside us.

[reijitokito]

Pasting my whole don quixote analysis thread to this site cause i want people to see it. Badly. Reminder i use he/she for donki DO NOT BE JARRED!!!

First of all i think the guy has alot of insecurity about her impulsiveness just. digged there but also feels extremely empty so she tries to make up for it by exaggerating parts of her personality.. THERE COULD BE MANY REASONS! possibly he was seen as emotionless due to being mentally Ill and showing obvious autistic symptoms at one point. which can explain her reaction to the mariachis. I believe she also represses her negative reactions to the things he sees on a daily basis and has been for a good chunk of his life which couldve caused some negative reactions in “friends” who would use this to support the wrongful perceptjon of her as emotional. i feel. she’s definitely hiding SOME shit and also may be exaggerating her personality for other reasons such as. A trauma response and i just believe he’s still the smae loving idealistic perosn at heart.. also the things she is possibly hiding dont seem to be anything too horrifying. So far alot of the signs of her steering away from his past and the internal lack of trust and engagement with the sinners can really justbe compared to what yi sang has done before chapter 4. On the topic of yi sang! Theres a good chunk of parallels between them, such as the fact they were the first two to get promos, their themes of delusion v. Reality, the sin envy in their second attack for both of their base egos, appearing unable to trust other sinners (which i will explain later!) and duitfulness to their ideals. Additionally i can also see donki’s friend group as being formed with a shared goal, as people who are outcasted though slowly with the introduction of new members becoming more torn and corrupted. While in Quixote’s case this seems MUCH worse than Yi Sang, this still would be something shared between them.

I feel like.. family history is similar to hong lu Rich family similar to original book and was probably very sheltered and restrainwd from meeting people possibly due to her family membershaving a poor perceptioj of her. I believe at one point she cut them off and probably decided to become a fixer with sancho which can explain alot of the hints at her being somewhat poor. I think sancho was at first one of the only other people in her life other than her family. I alsk believe there will be some GAY SHIT GOING ON! Back ontopic. I think Sancho either got 1. Corrupted by the rest of donqui’s friends 2. died at some point in which Quixote would probably internally blame himself for Sancho’s death. NOW BLOOD OF SANCHO!!! i believe the reason it need Pride that Quixote often lacks in ids (most importantly base id) is that quixote cannot accept sancho’s death and also cannot accept how horribly the rest of his friends acted towards him But with. The pride needed for the ego don would be able to accept their deaths and still keep sancho in her memory. ADDITIONALLY TELEPOLE. i think telepole relates directly to the repression and abuse and lack of control quixote experienced due to her peers.

I am ill the post is DONE! If you scroll back on my profile i have also made a post on why quixote is jewish. Please read it As well. Talk to me about this guy PLEASE!!!

Oh my vosh and i almost forgot. additionally she seems extreeemely stiff when being with the sinners and honestly seems extremely isolated im believing she was also possibly Not treated like a human whennyounger.. demonized and idolized at the same time and feeling he has to be perfect and knightlike at all times.

[neuroticboyfriend]

so many people think consequence and responsibility for wrongdoing is the same thing as oppression. you can do the first without the latter. it is possible. you don't have to justify human rights violations. y'all just sound like the people who think it's okay to misgender assholes who happen to be trans, except 10x more violent when it comes to people with demonized mental health conditions and neurodivergencies.

also treating a disability and the choice to harm others as one in the same only perptuates the idea that mentally ill and neurodivergent people are inherently violent, and it removes true culpability from the hands of the person who did wrong.

also also, some of you are the same people who go around saying shit like "people with BPD aren't manipulative and heartless! we actually all care too much and just have extreme emotions!" and you don't realize the fact the idea of demonized disabled people deserving rights and support is hinged on them being good, empathetic people is ALSO ableist.

we don't have to be good - either in earnest or your idea of goodness - to deserve mental health support, safe place to live, and to not die a horrible unspeakable death.

[vulpinesaint]

I am asking not just because i am going to be getting a bunch of pathfinder books for christmas but because i know enough about you as a mutual that i know im going to hear about the most deeply fucked up person imaginable. What is your pathfinder character like

giggling delightedly... ok listen he's maybe the worst guy ever but the issue here is that i love him. introducing you to faedren. he's a half-elf magus and he wields a bastard sword because i like the option of both dual/single-handed wielding but also because he's a bastard and i think it's funny. he's blonde. he walks up to you and smiles all charming but something about him is Wrong. and then he opens his mouth and he sounds like if you ran a frat boy through years of pretentious wellness retreats. he's a follower of calistria, goddess of lust, trickery, and revenge, and every other sentence out of him is about how in love he is with his goddess and how she's the most beautiful powerful perfect deity there is or how beautiful and perfect and healing bloody revenge can be. guy who sees you get pushed by somebody and comes over to put a hand on your shoulder, goes "hey, you don't have to take that. you are a strong, powerful person, and you didn't deserve that. don't let your heart sit with that hurt. you should Gut Them" and then waxes poetic about the wonderful catharsis of gory retribution and how it's all tied back to a goal-oriented mindset in the end. flirts with anyone possible. so insufferable that his party members literally wouldn't let him talk about himself for Weeks cause he's just so terrible to listen to. high charisma stat but he just fucking Sucks. and then you let him talk a little bit and it becomes clear that his "community" that he talks about taking him in when he was a baby is Definitely a cult. they're summoning demons to take revenge on people with the most power possible and it's absolutely a twist on calistria's Actual values cause her whole thing is Not to get caught up on unending revenge but faedren feels slighted and goes after it like a dog with a bone. hears a super powerful dhamphir say something negative about his goddess and has to be dragged away fuming by his party members going "growth mindset. i'm not strong enough to kill him horribly Yet." his whole terrible fuckboy schtick is cause he's learned that the only way he can access affection is through sex. he's for real in love with his goddess because she's the only thing that he believes really cares for him. he gets his chest rent apart and sees elysium (his heaven is full of hot women. go figure) and when he gets brought back his skin is Branded Back Together with the symbol of calistria and he's even WORSE about things after that (obsessed with having the symbol on him permanently). he gets close with the party members but doesn't know how to express that he cares about them. he's caught off guard because caring is never Easy and it always Hurts and the only affection he was ever shown as a child was conditional. he's got some fucked up views on pain and punishment because he was definitely abused as a kid. he attacks a dragon with a lightning spell imbued into his strike and does 200 damage in one hit and then whiffs every swing after that. he taught the little pumpkin leshy in their party to read. he might be getting turned into a vampire now. anyway all that to say that there is much happening with this guy and i love him very much. y'know. nice ass sorry about the mental illness king. intimidation stat crazy high and he's intimidated people into committing suicide twice. cornered an enemy on a cliff and made that bitch jump off. check out my faedren tag for more information 👍 :)

(+ quick derail to say that i love pathfinder. what a beautiful system... pathfinder is kind to you in so many ways. pathfinder loves you back. dnd laughs in your face and calls you a bitch but pathfinder kisses you gently on the forehead and gives you substantial bonuses on skills at lvl 1... what a world we could all be living in)

[a-sip-of-milo]

Anyways, I also wanted to say. You’re doing wonderful work having this blog up and running.

My first encounter with this kind of ableism was about schizophrenia. My uncle, the sweetest most gentle person I knew, had schizophrenia. When he passed away, my aunt (extremely ableist despite formerly working with disabled kids) made all kinds of nasty comments and assumptions about him in front of me afterwards, even trying to bait me and my sister into talking bad about him. It made me feel horrible, as I had the same symptoms as him, and I thought“how could someone be so horrible to someone just because of a disorder, even to someone they knew?” It really made me reconsider everything I’d been told about different mental illnesses, and led to me debunking and stopping my belief in things like “narcissistic abuse”.

Without accounts like yours, and people willing to stand up for others like you, that wouldn’t have been possible. With all the ableism everywhere, it’s more important than ever to keep fighting for stigmatized and demonized disorders. It makes me feel a little better, knowing that for every nasty Psych2go video or dangerous npd abusé article, there’s someone who will stand up for narcissists, or narcissists that will refuse to be quieted by the stigma.

So thank you very much! For everything you do on this account.

That's wonderful to hear, anon. I'm so sorry to hear about your uncle, and about your mother's behaviour towards you following his passing. I can't imagine how hurtful that must have been.

[marlaluster]

The devil is going crazy attacking!!!! It's been forcing extremely bad irritation!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

The devil just started going crazy attacking!!! It's been forcing stuff that it's to seem I'm thinking and feeling for some time and then just now it forced a really bad sense of irritation after it was like chasing me with this sense of self where I was supposed to feel this superficial sense or something, apparently like I was corny like the people of the world and not a real person like the people of the world.

The devil was just forcing it was supposed to seem he wasn't chasing me with a persona where I was supposed to be not a real person like the people of the world are not real people. The devil was saying it was to be that really what was happening was that I was cprrecting myself because it was wrong for me to say the people of the world are not real people. I don't think it is wrong and I do think I should be able to say what I perceive to be what is happening. I think the devil is attacking me. It is so obsessed to oppress that I'm not supposed to be able to say that's what's happening is the devil is attacking. It's obsessed to learn me that what's happening is supposed to just be what the people of the world say is happening, which is that nothing is attacking me and that I'm mentally ill. The devil pretends some people say it's possible demons could be attacking or something but those people are to secretly be who is to occur as who is not telling the truth. Secretly those people are supposed to be inferior or somehow said to be inferior to people saying some to experience demonic attack is mentally ill.

But the devil going crazy attacking and forcing I'm supposed to feel I'm a new person this evening where I'm not who I once was and now I'm supposed to be someone who's not a real person. The feeling it's forcing that is supposed to be a new sense of self is EXTREMELY IRRITATING!!!! I don't know how to describe, but I'm supposed to feel like I'm inferior to the devil and like I'm wrong and he's right. It seems it's being said by someone or the devil the or something that I'm supposed to feel like a lame person and not a cool person. The sense the devil is forcibg does feel like that.

It is so horrible and disgusting as fuck here!!! It's supposed to be just true that some people are losers, but it's oppressed upon me that I'm supposed to be a loser and I'm supposed to accept that I'm inferior to others who are rich and etc and that I'm supposed to be attacked by the devil everyday for the rest of my days!!! It is so EXTREMELY horrible, disgusting and sick as fuck here!!!

[blue-bower]

Don’t Lose my Inner Peace

My New Year's Resolution is to just... Improve myself as a person.

(Personal stuff below)

"Being a better person", and self-improvement in general, can look like a lot of things depending on the person. Being nicer, exercising, more self-care, indulging in hobbies more often.

For me personally, I want it to mean that I've finally learned to be at peace with myself. And that means accepting myself and my flaws. Understanding that just because things aren’t fully in my control, it doesn’t mean I’m not capable of taking lessons from it and coming out stronger. I started on the right track with that last year; I felt like I was floating on air back in March. Like I'd finally thrown away all the past feelings of existential dread, worrying about the future, general insecurities. I’d learned to accept the brooding, angry inner demon of mental illness and emotional trauma lurking below the surface rather than try so hard to push it down and feel ashamed of it. But then the year just... Kept getting worse. Losing my dad in a horrible unfair way, a heartbreaking but necessary confrontation and near falling-out with a friend, a new job so stressful that it made me break a 30-year streak of being straight-edge and then resist the urge to get high every night. My favorite holiday was ruined by a last-minute schedule change, Christmas sucked because I spent it grieving. All among other brooding feelings about toxic people and toxic family relationships that threatened to poison my peace. By December I'd just, become so angry and crotchety, and fell into such an emotional rut that I wondered if I'd changed at all.

But in the last few days leading up to New Year's, it's like something clicked in me. I'd had enough. I realized that, yes, I have changed for the better. I've become more confident. I've learned to stop resenting a past that I can't change. I've learned to take life at my own pace and stop caring so much about drama and people’s expectations of me when they barely know me on a personal level. I've gone from petrified to showing my true self, to not giving a fuck what people think of me and being tired of having to hide my identity, my sexuality, and my true, wild self. I’m not going to be a fucking doormat anymore.

And I desperately want to keep that energy through 2023.

Change is possible. Breaking out of a dark place is possible. You just, gotta be stubborn as hell and push through it. Really do some self-reflection, come to terms with what you need to change about yourself, for your own sake, not for anyone else’s.

Happy New Year, everyone. Here’s to a clean slate.

[relaxxattack]

Not Quite An Essay On Ableism Within the DreamSMP Fandom

[relaxx’s note: this was not written by me! It was originally submitted by an anonymous user to @habeascorpseus. i liked this essay a lot and transcribed it to text for easier consumption. ALSO, this will go on for several reblogs, so please wait until i get to the end. enjoy!]

Fandom seemed all for exploration of the effects of trauma on the kids, but only ever in a romanticized way. People speculated about the two of them being afraid of fireworks, explosions, thunder, and loud noises and their response being tears and panic attacks easily calmed with a well-placed hug and some breathing exercises. The "softer," more understandable side of trauma was fandom's playground. And all of this, in combination with fandom's tendency to see Tommy and Tubbo as a duo and not individuals, sowed the seeds of future discourse for when they broke out of those molds.

All throughout the Pogtopia v Manberg war, everyone somewhat jokingly blamed George for not showing up to the election. George was positioned as the first domino in the line leading to Schlatt's takeover, L'manberg’s destruction, and Wilbur's spiral culminating in death. Tommy persuaded Ranboo into helping him grief George's house, and Dream saw it as an opportunity to stir conflict between him and Tubbo. He pushed for Tommy’s punishment, and this quickly set off a chain effect of Tommy and Tubbo inadvertently triggering each other.

The idea that he would be punished harshly for a benign crime, possibly even exiled as he was not long before when Schlatt came into power and L'manberg's downfall began, set Tommy on edge. He responded in classic Tommy fashion-- being bold and loud and lashing out at others to cover up how much he was afraid and hurting. In his lashing out, he similarly hit Tubbo’s soft spots. He called into question and undermined Tubbo's leadership, reminding him of his time under Schlatt and Wilbur's assertion that he was a yes-man. He even compared him to Schlatt, the man who in hindsight had taunted him with the knowledge that Tubbo was a spy and then had him executed for it. In response, Tubbo lashed out at Tommy, and the two continued to play on each others' fears back and forth.

Unlike fandom’s dreams of "harmless'' displays of trauma, Tommy and Tubbo responded with anger rather than solely depression.

Does this sound familiar? It should. Much like with how Wilbur was demonized the instant his mental illness was exhibited in an "ugly" way, Tommy and Tubbo were quickly demonized for their own responses to trauma and how it broke up their perceived "duo" status. Half of the fandom dug into Tommy's past and framed all of his actions as born out of selfishness and an innate chaos and lack of empathy. He was painted as the root of all conflict. Meanwhile, the other half of the fandom claimed that Wilbur had been right all along— that Tubbo's behavior was that of a mindless yes-man. They claimed that Tubbo exiling Tommy was a sure sign that he was going to become the same horrible person and dictator that Schlatt was, and they predicted that Tubbo would turn out comically evil. Tubbo trying to kill Technoblade (the man who'd killed him and destroyed his nation and implied that he would come back and destroy everything again if a government stayed in power) under pressure from Quackity and Fundy was framed as an explicit wrong, and from that fandom extrapolated that Tubbo would follow a path of evil. They predicted that he'd stop caring about Tommy, that he'd value his presidency first, that he'd kill Ranboo when he found out he was a traitor.

Fandom villified both Tommy and Tubbo as soon as they could no longer fit in the box of "soft, traumatized sad bois." This is only further confirmed by fandom's reaction to Tommy's exile arc.

Tommy's suicidal thoughts in exile were portrayed in the same vein mainstream media always portrays them- - and that's not meant to be an insult, it was a well done arc. But it showcases how fandom handles mental illness. Where before Tommy was demonized for lashing out, as soon as he dropped his anger and expressed his feelings primarily through easily digestible and unproblematic self-harm, fandom welcomed him back with open arms. He went right back to the "soft, traumatized sad boi" box.

And then, once he was safely back in that box, fandom started contemplating a villain arc for him.

[jawbone-xylophone]

Okay, so. Some of the Moon Knight stuff I like, some of it I don’t, the actual Egypt stuff is sketchy, but I’m here to be mentally ill not an anthropologist. So!

I really, genuinely do not like their “switching” sequence. What are you, a magical girl? Do we really need you to be arching up with your eyes rolled back like a demon, sir? I don’t even like DID YouTube but everyone who wants an inch of clout has been recording their switches. Watch them. I don’t care if it’s a TV show, switching does not look like that and it is painfully, harmfully inaccurate.

I’m not going to make overarching claims on what it “feels like” to be in the back because everyone’s different, but the unwashed American preacher man with a highly inaccurate vaguely evangelical “Ammit” cult being able to peg that Steven is a system from spying on one conversation is a little sketchy to me. Layla’s disbelief is a lot more believable, if torturous as an audience member- my ex didn’t really believe what was going on with me until my other me fronted very dramatically once in a parking lot.

The other thing that, while understandable given the plot, drives me ABSOLUTELY NUTS is people trying to posi trigger Marc. You don’t do that. You don’t fucking do that.

For those unaware: your average citizen is probably passingly familiar with a negative trigger. Let’s say someone comes from an abusive home, and the abusive parent smokes. Cigarette smoke, therefore, would get associated with terrible horrible things, and like Pavlov’s dogs, even the scent of it later might have them panicking and backing into the nearest corner regardless of logic.

Negative triggers also work in a system for queuing switches, because if you’re in danger, the part of you best equipped to handle that is going to handle that while you dissociate half out of your mind from fear. I’m giving you the Sparknotes, but that’s the very basics.

A positive trigger is something that makes your brain go brrr in a good way. This works with alters too. If one of your alters really likes writing, you might consistently forget what happens during poetry class because that alter is going instead of you. You’re not traumatized about writing or anything, they just... really like it and there you go.

Now, manners time.

Outside of possibly a medical setting, it is completely unacceptable for someone outside of the system to try to control who’s fronting for their own personal benefit. Calling names, asking us to bring an alter out, using positive or negative triggers to force a switch- none of that is okay and you should not do that. We are not carnival wheels for you to flip for your convenience, we’re people. Alters have a function within the system that is not to cater to the whims of third parties.

There are rare exceptions to the rule, because sometimes I ask my friends to help me posi trigger out an alter, but you should never do it unprompted.

“Can I talk to Marc?” Polite, if bizarre coming from a stranger.

“Marc Spector where is the scarab.” (at Steven) Entirely unacceptable, up your mother’s ass, goodbye.

I get what the context is, in the story, but by all the gods if people are watching this not knowing which parts are magical Hollywood and which parts are mental health then somebody needs to say these things.

Do not get me started on the Egyptology side because I’m an anthropology major and I will not shut up.

[crossdressingdeath]

There are a surprising number of people in real life who think being traumatized or being mentally ill permits you to treat other people horribly. I can see why so many of Cullen's fans sympathize with him and justify his behavior. They don't believe it's possible to grow or recover from your trauma, and even if you really can't, you still shouldn't treat people horribly anyway. It's sad, really.

Oh, absolutely, which is why I hate that DAI pushes that same story with multiple of its characters. Aside from Cullen the one that irks me the most is Sera, going on about how much the Dalish suck to her Dalish friend or girlfriend and freaking out whenever they tell her she's hurting them because apparently suggesting that maybe she should show the barest modicum of respect for their culture means they're calling her stupid. The bit where she'll break up with her girlfriend over their different religious beliefs and then act like it's all Lavellan's fault that their relationship is in tatters because Lavellan heard her ultimatum and said "Okay, then we're done" instead of immediately renouncing her religion is especially disgusting. In a similar vein, Cullen making a huge thing about how uncomfortable he is around mages to his mage friend or girlfriend and not considering for a second that they might have reason to be just as uncomfortable or more so around Templars as he is around mages is horrible. And in both cases this is treated as okay, both in-game and by the fandom. Hey! If a friend or significant other expects you to suppress or abandon something important to you or central to who you are because it makes them uncomfortable while they make zero effort to consider your side of things to the point of constantly insulting that thing or part of you and getting mad if you tell them to stop, you drop them like a sack of bricks! Because even if they're not being actively malicious you're clearly not compatible! And also no matter what trauma they've got they have no right to do that to you! Please do not act like people are obligated to put up with that shit!

If you've got trauma or are neurodivergent then yes, sometimes that's going to lead to rough patches with people and that's okay and can be worked through. But it's still your responsibility to be a decent fucking person. Yes, Cullen was tortured, and that's awful. But he turns that around to attack mages, none of whom have ever hurt him (remember that he was tortured by demons; Uldred started the whole thing, but he's not in control by the time that the Warden shows up), and that's treated like it's fine. If he can't deal with his trauma in a healthy way he shouldn't be anywhere near mages. He certainly shouldn't be in charge of the military of a supposedly neutral organization. He's had ten years to try to move past what happened to him, and there's no evidence that he made any effort in that time. And I can feel for the guy! What happened to him sucked! But he and his fans use that as an excuse for how he treats the mages he interacts with like shit, and that's not okay.

[cqlfeels]

Why do you think Wei Wuxian didn't pretend it was Wen Zhuliu who crushed his golden core, so that he could tell people about it? I get he probably didn't want to during the war but it's so sad to see him push everyone away afterwards and them all speculate about why he's not carrying his sword and doing demonic cultivation, and it seems like an excuse they'd believe. Do you think it's just pride?

My understanding of it is:

It would raise questions. Using his Core, WWX's unorthodox cultivation is frowned upon but accepted for pragmatic reasons. If they know for a fact he's using demonic cultivation because his Core is entirely gone, WWX will probably be executed so the major sects won't lose face by having relied on the forbidden techniques of a criminal.

The Jiang have barely any disciples left, and if their most senior disciple has no Core, that has serious political implications even outside of war considerations. WWX isn't related to JC, so if he is of no use as a disciple, his high status within the sect seems like undue favoritism. Could he even move among gentry, if his birth status is just minor gentry and he has no Core? Even if WWX swallows his pride, this reflects badly on the Jiang as being one more loss to the sect. It might also make JC seem easier to physically harm - WWX has a reputation of being a great cultivator, and JC is protected in part by that reputation. If WWX is weakened, so is JC.

JC would probably blame himself: if WWX lost his Core, he could've used the "surgery" but he gave away that right to JC. I doubt the surgery could be performed twice on the same person in the lie WWX told JC. JC might not know WWX gave his Core to him, but just knowing WWX saved him from a Core-less life and he can't repay that favor would be very upsetting at a time when JC needs to be as strong as possible to establish himself as a major player in the post-war world.

And (and I think this might be the strongest reason) WWX probably just doesn't want his loved ones to worry about him. Acting weird, or even being ill, aren't as horrible as losing his Core. It's the difference between "The war permanently impacted my physical and mental health" and "I was mutilated by the man who massacred my family." They'll worry either way (as they should!) but one just sounds more horrifying

But I think this is one of the things where it's never really directly explained, iirc? So there are probably other explanations you could go with.

[arirna]

Do you mind if I ask your top 10 favorite characters (can be male or female) from all of the media that you loved (can be anime, books, movies or tv series)? Thanks....

Oh now that's a great ask! Thank you for giving me an opportunity to gush about my faves!

Disclaimer: the order in this list is irrelevant since i love these characters equally (although for different reasons). Also possible spoilers too, since sometimes i need to explain why i like these characters due to their true role in the narrative.

1. Tsukuyo (GIntama)

Gintama in general has a great cast of female characters (which was severely underutilised in later arcs to my great dismay) but Tsukuyo still remains my favorite among them. The story arcs which involved her are considered by me the best Gintama arcs by far.

What really resonated with me about Tsukuyo is the way she's allowed to be both strong and vulnerable by the narrative. She's a person who is greatly defined by her duty and loyalty to the people she protects and cares for but it doesn't mean that she doesn't have her own personal struggles and insecurities to work through and the story doesn't shy away from that. I'm always a sucker for quiet understated characters with inner turmoil.

And also she has a great character design as well which is always a plus for me.

2. Dimitri Alexandre Blaiddyd (Fire Emblem Three Houses)

Three Houses as a game was quite ambitious in regards to the way it tried to structure its main plot and character arcs for its main cast. Having three (+ a not so secret 4th) routes which explore each main lord and their closest allies was an interesting idea but unfortunately the way it was implemented wasn't the best one. It was mostly due to the inconsistencies between character writing in different routes (Edelgard for me was the biggest victim of that) and the way some importaint reveals about the main plot and lore were hidden behind only one or two routes so you may completely miss the point of certain scenes or character motivations in other routes (although that was most likely made on purpose but i'm not sure it worked in the narrative's favor).

However, Dimitri and his route Azure Moon avoided most of these problems by making its main narrative focus mainly on DImitri's character arc and his relationships with Byleth, Dedue, Edelgard and his allies without focusing too much on the game's very vague and convoluted lore and the frankly underwhelming "true" main antagonists.

Thanks to that Dimitri managed to get one of the best character arcs in the game which fully explored his struggles with his mental illness and the pain and tragedy he had to endure. His redemption arc may have been slightly fumbled due to the limitations of this game's gameplay and structure but I still consider it a very good example of how redemptions arcs can be done.

The way he managed to pick himself up again after ending up in such a dark place mentally in his life and to persevere despite everything so he can become the person he always aspired to be was very uplifting to see. Also he’s a huge simp and a great malewife material - we love to see it!

3. Sessyoin Kiara (Fate franchise)

Kiara is the case of a person who was actually qualified to be a Messiah figure in her life going very very horribly right(???).

This lady was the head of the sex cult which promised salvation for humanity and she was very good at her job. Unfortunately for everyone involved Kiara only considered herself to be the one true human being (she’s just like me fr) while everyone else she viewed to be mindless apes who are only useful to her as her personal playthings and it’s their true salvation in her eyes. After certain shenanigans involving digital space battle royale on the Moon she managed to become an actual Demonic Bodhisattva who almost drowned the whole world in pleasure for her own ascension into godhood.

So she was the Girlboss(tm) basically and while she was defeated in the end since people hate to see a girlboss winning, thanks to a certain gacha spinoff game she made a glorious comeback and now she’s busy scheming and helping the protagonists along the way for her own amusement.

Unlike the previous characters i just like Kiara because she’s nuts and evil and she owns it 100%. While it’s obvious that she toys with the idea that she might change her stance on the whole “i’m the only Human Being in this world”, she still remains true to herself and it’s fun to see a villainous character like her.

4. Queen Marika the Eternal (Elden Ring)

Another Girlboss(tm) character who is for the most part relegated to be a background figure for the lore and yet her actions and her agenda shape the world and the narrative of the whole game.

Marika was chosen as the reigning sovereign Goddess of the world called the Lands Between and she proceeded to rule it by getting rid of Death as the concept in her world, war mongering her rule across all lands, starting multiple relationship dramas involving her exes, her new husband (but not really) and her multiple demigod kids, maybe or maybe not helping one of her kids with their planned heist of the rune which brings back Death, shattering the World Order, getting imprisoned and secretly guiding you, the player, while pretending to serve the true Big Boss of this world.

Did she utilize her Girlpower correctly while doing all of these things? I’m not sure but hell, she sure was committed to it all. I hope future DLCs will allow us to learn more about her as a person but even now i can safely say that she’s a fascinating character and i can see GRRM’s handprints all over her since he’s a huge fun of morally dubious but ambitious characters like Marika.

5. Taichi Mashima (Chihayafuru)

In the cast full of idealistic people fully dedicated to their favorite card game Taichi instantly took over the narrative for the most part of the story by being an extremely flawed and human character full of jealousy, self-loathing and insecurity, but also compassion, understanding and loyalty.

He is the second lead in the romantic drama who is (tragically) destined to lose to the perfect (debatable on my end tho) main male lead and yet you root for this guy anyway since he’s so compelling as a character (he’s also hot AND rich and he is voiced by Mamoru Miyano so he has that going for him, i guess).

6. Makima (Chainsaw Man)

No way! Another very morally dubious Girlboss(tm) character on this list! Groundbreaking!

Makima is the benevolent (???) head of the government group responsible for hunting and killing demons haunting Japan and she is the one who recruits the main character to do this job with the promise to personally fulfill any of his wishes (so you know it’s a good deal without any hidden agenda on her part).

You can instantly tell that this lady is to be reckoned with and that she will use anything and anyone to achieve her goals. Considering what a rarity it is to see such a female character in a shounen manga, she really was a breath of fresh air for me personally and I uncritically support everything she did in that series since I (unlike some of you) love to see a girlboss winning.

7. Claire Stanfield (Baccano!)

He’s a cute guy who instantly got a crush on a lady who tried to kill him (he’s just like me fr). He also happens to be an assassin who is infamous for slaughtering his victims in a brutal fashion. So you know, gap moe! Love capable guys who are also loyal malewives!

8. Zagreus (Hades)

The Son of Hades, this character won’t ever shut up, cracks jokes at every opportunity, acts like an asshole when provoked and he also may end up in a polyamorous relationship with the personification of Death and one of the Greek Furies.

Zag could’ve been quite an insufferable character but thanks to the strong writing he comes off as a charming, kind, honest and chill dude who just wants his family and his friends to be happy and at peace with themselves. Also he’s an important genuine sassy bottom representation! We need more of those!

9 and 10. Hori Masayuki and Kashima Yuu (Gekkan Shoujo Nozaki kun) (do not separate them!!!)

They were the Blueprint for me. The two absolutely dense and idiotic characters who are unknowingly in love with each other. Hori is a short king with anger issues who is perpetually tired and simps non stop for Kashima, while she is an extremely charismatic and energetic himbo who wants to be noticed by him at all times.

I love all of the GSNK cast A LOT but these two will always have a special place in my heart since their relationship is so silly and yet so compelling. They really should kiss ASAP.