#the differences of abuse

[lightofraye]

A Little Perspective

This may be lengthy and detailed and potentially triggering for some. I will be covering a number of possible points of view about things covering why Jensen hasn't left--and may never. (A prospective I'm not thrilled about, to be honest.)

So. Let's begin.

1) Abuse: This is double issue for Jensen. Potentially a triple. How do I mean? For instance, Jensen himself admitted his father beat him with a belt--and from the sound of it, a lot, while he was growing up, as Jensen knew thinner belts hurt more. Worse, his father said he did it "out of love", so there's that bad, unpleasant association right out the bat.

Plus, his mother... this is only speculation, an assumption. She either looked the other way and accepted the abuse, or she was a participant of the abuse and thought it was normal/acceptable. That too may color Jensen's perspective and not a good way either.

Then Jensen became a model... and the modeling industry is/was rife on abuse. A lot of stories come out later where those who quit the industry or endured it suffered a great deal of sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual abuse.... A "pretty boy" like Jensen likely would've suffered as well. I don't believe he's ever shared stories and he likely may never.

(Hi, toxic perception of men as victims again.)

I can't even begin about the sexual abuse that is rampant in Hollywood itself. Yes, women were largely targets, but as we've heard the last few years,... so have been men.

Hell, Jensen was sexually assaulted by Misha! It was used in a fucking gag reel! It's not funny! Jensen even said if he had known they were going to put it in the gag reel, he would've asked them not to. That to me speaks volumes.

There are brief stories out there. A PA witnessed Danneel slapping Jensen when she thought Jensen was flirting with the PA. (He wasn't; he's just that sweet.) There's another story of some restaurant goer who saw how harsh Danneel was bullying Jensen outside the restaurant.

He's... diminished. His baseline for normal is not the baseline for normal for non-abused people. His self-esteem, confidence, and ability to stand up for himself is heavily damaged. He doesn't know how to stand up for himself. Every time he has, he's been smacked down.

Yes, he can stand up for others time to time, but there are instances when he didn't and gave up in face of authority. (Mark Sheppard being demoted to guest star and losing pay and choosing to quit instead... only had Jared standing up for him in the end. Misha caved instantly and Jensen gave up as well.)

So what then does it mean for him and Danneel? Did she become abusive off the bat? No. That's not how abusers work. There were likely instances where she slipped and he mentally made excuses, ignored the red flags because that's how it tends to happen. Hindsight is ever perfect. Being in the heat of it, we tend to try and excuse, defend, or otherwise rewrite it in our minds. We don't want to think of it as normal.

Then once they were married, Danneel began to let that completely slip and fall, and he was "trapped". The cycle continues. By now he thinks of it as normal, acceptable, maybe impossible to escape. He has likely been told no one would want him. He's "middle-aged", damaged goods. This has also been told to female victims and it's hard to break that mindset too. It's hard to find strength to completely break free when you've been fed insidious lies since childhood.

It's a trap. A difficult trap to break. Can it happen? Yes. But it's very, very hard.

2. Blackmail: This one can fall under two very different categories. One, the abuse one. Where the children (I've mentioned this before) are being used as hostages to guarantee Jensen's continued marriage to Danneel. As in, "If you divorce me, I'll make sure you never see the kids again!" It's a common threat, to boot.

Despite what some people have said, I believe Jensen loves his children. Yes, "especially" JJ, but I believe he loves all three. He may not be home a lot to see them, but he loves them. He would like to keep that access to them. It may be he believes Danneel's threat, and I'm sure there's some who believe it'd be "easy" for a woman to make such a threat and keep it.

Here's a hint, folks. The truth to that lie. If a father asks for full custody of the children in a divorce, they usually get that request granted, no matter what. But most of them don't ask for that, and so, the parent that does ask gets it granted. So... if a husband and wife vie against each other and both ask, guess who wins? The father.

Most fathers don't think to ask because of the perception of mothers always win. Mothers are the ones who should be responsible for children. And so forth.

Regardless... Jensen likely might believe that threat and feels some access is better than none.

Then the other kind of blackmail. Note: I do not believe nearly all that I'm about to write. This is purely speculative and a number of possible blackmail that Danneel might have over him.

There's the J2 tinhat rumors. I could see why those rumors lasted as long as they have. I've seen the stories, the posts, photos, watched them in conventions. It's entirely possible that Jared and Jensen did have some romantic/sexual relationship for a time. Maybe even after they got married to Genevieve and Danneel, it might have continued.

It could be Genevieve just accepted it and when it ended (as there was a gradual separation even before the whole The Winchesters/Prequelgate debacle), Jared and Gen were okay. Danneel... however... might not have been as okay with it as she indicated. Her posts over the years, where she tried to make it seem she and Jensen were together when fan photos and such came out at the same time of Jensen and Jared together, might've been wildly embarrassed by it all. She might not have been as okay with it as Genevieve was and just collected evidence to hold over Jensen's head.

After all, sadly, Hollywood still isn't as accepting of LGBTQ as we'd like. When actors come out, their careers usually don't continue, out of the weird perception that gay men can't act straight. (When I hear that, I look at Matt Bomer and go "Are you sure?!" I believed Bomer was a charming straight man even after he came out--his character on White Collar was awesome!)

So there's that possibility.

Then there's the orgies rumor we've heard about in the past. Or rather that one tweet that led to a threat of a lawsuit--which sadly made it valid and legitimate. Danneel really didn't know how to let a rumor die. It might make her look weird and bad too, but her career has been nonexistent for a long time and her reputation has already been destroyed by her own actions. It wouldn't hurt her nearly as much as it might hurt Jensen.

Then there's other possible vices. Alcoholism seems to be the more... "acceptable" of vices. As is smoking. If an actor is an alcoholic, they just go to rehab, get help, and be fine. But for someone who is self-conscious about their image, it might be more difficult to accept. Being seen drunk time to time is not the same as being an alcoholic, after all.

The same goes for drugs. Not that rumor has been very well-known, but it can exist.

Then there's the blackmail of affairs. In Hollywood, affairs and flings are considered a part of the life. They happen. Couples that are apart for a while time to time may dabble in affairs and flings. Even with co-stars. This happens too. More than most would like. (The more infamous one would be Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie on the set of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Others have happened too. It's just common and accepted. Anyone saying otherwise is just wrong.)

Again, image-conscious and wanting to push the solid love marriage, this could be damaging. Even if Danneel hadn't really made it much of a secret that she's been having an on-and-off affair with Steve... it's still different. I repeat: she has no career or reputation to destroy. Jensen does.

Even if Hollywood wouldn't give that big of a damn about it.

3. PR Marriage: Now I know this has been pushed by other antis, and even suggested to me, but I find myself... hesitating on it. If it was in fact a PR marriage, why would he tolerate the abuse at all? Surely there'd be something in the contract about demeaning him and belittling him? It doesn't fit.

And there should have been protection over mistreatment or not fulfilling parts of it. I don't know... it doesn't quite fit. Not for me.

--

This was a long, long essay. I knew it would be, and it was still hard to write parts of it.

I want to end it with another point.

Female on male violence is often portrayed as a joke. Wedding Crashers had a female on male rape and it was a joke, a comedy bit. The one time I remember seeing such a scenario used on Law and Order: SVU, the male victim wasn't believed because he was a man and should have been able to overpower the woman.

Like it's expected of men to be able to just beat the shit out of their abusive partners... as though no one realized that if come upon by the police, any bruises on her would be taken more seriously than over him! Even if he had bruises too! Unless there's video evidence of physical abuse on him, anything else is considered... a joke. Impossible.

What's sad is that this too is an aspect of misogyny. Men are expected to be able to overpower women, so when a man is "taking" abuse and not fighting back, it's another part of misogyny. Because he's "lesser" than a woman, and that's shameful.

We have a lot of growing to do as a society. We need to realize that just because one person is making the money does not mean they hold all the power. We've only begun to see the problems of abuse, and all the areas it covers.

There's physical abuse, the one most commonly known. Then sexual, the second commonly known. The lesser recognized are financial (unless a person is a senior citizen, then it's considered a legitimate crime), and mental and emotional being the least known or recognized (only considered legitimate if done on a child and with proof).

Until we end the toxic expectations of men, and yes, women, and realize anyone can be a victim, and that we all, as a whole, deserve respect... we have a long way to go.

Just remember: It begins with you. It begins with us.

[ithinkdogshouldvote]

Guardian swap au for 4/13 ^ ^

[conditioned-to-obey]

"Sit. Stay. Down. That's right, good pup. Now, play dead." You laugh and lay back with your eyes closed. Thinking it's a joke. The way you sprawl out under me makes my cock twitch.

There's a long pause, longer than any other. It's an off key, absent kind of sound.

Lifting your head up a bit, only to be pressed back down firmly into position. "Down. Stay-" You try to peek an eye open but my hand doesn't alleviate from your face. "I said: Stay."

You keep your eyes shut, confusion trickling like cold water down your spine. My breathing turns heavier as I run my hands down your body, "that's it. Good. Stay just like that- you're doing so good."

You freeze. Not moving a muscle as I pry your limp legs apart. Looking up from your pretty little cunt to your slack face, eerily still–you almost look like you're sleeping. Almost– and back down.

I'm bottoming out inside you before I can process the vapid desperate motion. Barely enough thought to pull your panties around your ankles. Holding you down by your head as I growl and quiet you. "shhh, that's right. Don't make a sound. Play dead. playdeadplaydeadplaydead, pup. Fuck- dead things don't whimper. They don't react, shush now."

While I violate you, I feel the dead weight of forcibly relaxed muscles clench and grip my thick cock. The tension and discomfort in you palpable. But your little head is spinning, it feels so good. You have to be a good doggy while you lie there and just take it. Doing exactly as your told. Each thrust jostling you, and you can't even scream. You can't move. You're dead. You're dead and I'm using your holes to jerk off.

A sick twisting in your guts tells you that you're going to cum from being used like snuffbait.

I tell you that too.

Right before I fill you up and clamp a hand over your mouth so you can't breathe and ruin the immersion of the moment for me. I want you to play dead a little longer.

[inkskinned]

hey btw if you're in the USA at  2:20 p.m. ET on Wednesday, Oct. 4, they're testing the emergency broadcast system. your phone is probably going to make a really loud noise, even if it's on silent. there's a backup date on the 11th if they need to postpone it.

if you're not in a safe situation and have an extra phone, you should turn that phone completely off beforehand.

additionally, if you're like me, and are easily startled; i recommend treating it like a party. have a countdown or something. be surrounded by your loved ones. take the actions you personally need to take to make yourself safe.

i have already seen mockery towards any person who feels nervous about this. for the record, it completely, completely valid to have "emergency broadcast sounds" be an anxiety trigger. do not let other people make fun of you for that. emergency sounds are legitimately engineered to make us take action; those of us with high levels of anxiety and/or neurodivergence are already pre-disposed to have a Bad Time. sometimes it is best to acknowledge that the situation will be triggering for some, and to prepare for that; rather than just saying "well that's stupid, it's just a test."

"loud scary sound time" isn't like, my favorite thing, but we can at least try to prevent some additional anxiety by preparing for it. maybe get yourself a cake? noise cancelling headphones? the new hozier album? whatever helps. love u, hope you're okay. we are gonna ride it out together.

[danlous]

I feel like many people have a fundamental misconception of what unreliable narrator means. It's simply a narrative vehicle not a character flaw or a sign that the character is a bad person. There are also many different types of unreliable narrators in fiction. Being an unreliable narrator doesn't necessarily mean that the character is 'wrong', it definitely doesn't mean that they're wrong about everything even if some aspects in their story are inaccurate, and only some unreliable narrators actively and consciously lie. Stories that have unreliable narrators also tend to deal with perception and memory and they often don't even have one objective truth, just different versions. It reflects real life where we know human memory is highly unreliable and vague and people can interpret same events very differently

[technically-human]

Hey, don't cry. Ghost yuri, okay?

(Now that you know the girls, they need to meet the boys!)

[wild-magic-oops]

take notes, Gale bby

[trans-androgyne]

Yes, trans men and mascs have historically been subjected to less public violence and ridicule than trans women and fems. Is having privilege really the only reason you can think of for that? Have you considered that they had less ability to be publicly visible in the first place? Please remember that the lack of autonomy women have historically been granted also applies to transmascs. They would have been considered the property of men. Spousal rape wasn't illegal everywhere in my country until 1993. How easy do you think it would be for forcibly impregnated transmascs to transition? For abused transmascs in general? Do you think they were all even allowed out of the house often without a man? There are so many stories of transmascs being forcibly institutionalized for being trans. Is that situation and otherwise being quietly abused and erased really so much better than hypervisibility?

[toffeebrew]

Dog coded cross, but like it's sad.

not sure what this genre of art I'm doing is, but I like it.

[bixels]

I'm not explaining why re-imagining characters as POC is not the same as white-washing, here of all places should fucking understand.

[mosovi-vian]

And I will stay alive for my future self, so they can one day learn to be kind to who I was as a child. And I will teach them to honor who we used to be, so they can remember the comfort of what once was our untempered flesh and gentle soul. Me and myself are each a fresh wound and a rough scab, bearing respectively the gift of green faith and honed will.

This has been in my draft for a while because I was determined to post this only after I knew what I should write underneath it. I’ve read a lot on the concept of healing the wounded inner child since even before my c-ptsd diagnosis. However, I’ve sought as much comfort in my little self as they had in me. Looking back, I was an impressively emotionally-intuitive kid. I remember well how I used to think, the things I would write to my future self; they were wiser and gentler than I could ever hope to be as an adult. Needless to say, the little poem above is inspired by the aforementioned experience. Sure, big me is armed with a more developed pre-frontal cortex and access to invaluable resources (coping mechanisms, therapy, on and offline communities) , but I struggle to rediscover/reinvent my identity. Little me was the biggest vestige of my lost personhood. So yeah, this might be just a huge self-indulgent projection with my favorite character, but thinking that post-S3 Hunter would also be in my shoes is not completely baseless. 16yrs old Hunter is the fresh wound (a lot of things happened before his teen years, but I’m going to interpret the events of Hollow Mind - which happened when Hunter was 16 - as the ultimate boiling point in his trauma timeline, hence the ‘fresh wound') and 20yrs old Hunter is the rough scab. Each version of Hunter could be dealing with a different set of trauma-induced symptoms. I think his loyalty to Belos kept him going as a child. Being doubtless was important to Hunter back then; it held his sense of self together. And maybe when he survived and was rewarded the time and space to grow into his own person and live for himself, there was this lasting emptiness. I feel this sort of emptiness even today. My only reference of what ‘wholeness’ felt like was when I was obedient to my family. I equated self-abandonment as the righteous norm. The symptoms I deal with today are definitely different from when I was Hunter’s age pre-time-skip. Now that Hunter is in a safe space and an adult post-time skip, he might also need to seek that strength from his younger self. Reminding himself of how far he’s come and the parts of him that he'd like to keep from his past. The parts that he knows in his bones are purely his - not instilled by Belos, not inherited from Caleb.

[sugarpasteltmnt]

"Acolyte" Michelangelo has joined the group chat

THANK U AGAIN TO @anixolt for accepting this commission request!!! Looks like 'Dino'-tello has unexpected company 👀

Hailing from his own alternate reality, "Acolyte" Mikey & his brothers had a very different childhood than the mad Dogs we all know and love. Set in a feudal Japan-esque world, Mikey and his brothers were raised under the Ninja Tribunal in a remote temple as future protectors of humanity...

However, fate was unkind to the lackadaisical Michelangelo who doubted the legend of the foretold 'Krang Invasion'-- let alone it happening much sooner than anticipated.

[link to twitter thread]

More lore below! (but heed the content warnings!!)

CW: implied family death, implied child abuse

Inspired by the 2003 "Acolyte" Arc, Mikey and his brothers were given to the Ninja Tribunal as children to raise as warriors on account of being gifted with mystic abilities; something very rare and unheard of in their universe.

Mikey was the most mystically inclined of his brothers. Because of this, he doesn't take training very seriously. He's also the oldest brother in his universe, but takes that role very, very seriously.

Splinter was their "father"... however, he was the one who gave them to the Ninja Tribunal. And they weren't exactly 'lenient' with children. Not when their purpose was to become warriors to defend the world. Because of this, Mikey hates Splinter. With every fiber in his body.

But despite their upbringing, Mikey was fun and kind.

But homie cannot cook to save his life

However, due to events during the invasion... Mikey is the last man standing. On the whole planet.

And he Snaps

With elevated powers and grief, Mikey traverses the heavens to hunt Krang and their settlements.

He uses dried Krang blood as his mask, having lost his in battle (and Krang blood dries orange when oxidized)

He dots his yellow spots with a drop of Krang blood to mirror Krang eyes. Using mystic abilities, the faux eyes can move and "look" around too. Terrifying.

However, due to classic Hamato shenanigans— 'Acolyte' Mikey may find himself drawn to a very, very different place than a Krang settlement 👀👀👀

[strawberryseeded]

I'm seeing sum ppl being like "Sukuna is being sooo unreasonable reacting so angrily bc Yuuji wants to kill him like what did he expect!!!" but Sukuna's not angry bc of that. I think he'd even prefer Yuuji to insta kill him. That whole time he was in the places of Yuuji's memory he's been waiting for Yuuji to get it over with, already. Expecting Yuuji to kill him.

But then

Yuuji basically tells him: That just now? Yeah, it was me giving you a chance. Because, even though i hate you, i dont want to kill you. Because you are human. You don't have to play this role.

And that's what enrages Sukuna so fucking much. The brat has the gall to feel sorry for him. Him, the strongest. Him, someone unabashedly uncaring, unfeeling beyond repair. Evil.

Sukuna is not like other people. He doesn't see himself as people; that's why he can't ever find an "equal", can't even fathom finding one. He doesn't have a role, he does what he wants, because he can.

At this point he can endure Yuuji killing him. He had help, he got lucky, idk, whatever excuse he's probably telling himself will do. He will face it without feeling a thing; not anger, not sadness, no happiness, no fear. He's above it all... But Yuuji feeling sorry for him? Like he's above Sukuna?

Yuuji is threatening Sukuna, yes, but that's not all. He's showing him everything that will be taken away from him. From Sukuna, by Yuuji.

Like Sukuna is like any other mortal who walks the Earth. Vulnerable. A human being instead of a monster.

(So, uuh, yeah no. Sukuna won't act all chill like always lol...)

[elainiisms]

this line makes me miserable because god despite everything he really did love that girl so much. he raised her, he taught her, he made her, he IS her!

[deservedgrace]

something that's really been bothering me lately is how the church i was a part of would like... repackage doctrine to make it sound nicer and more acceptable. like, the belief that all humans are evil by nature and deserve eternal torture for the crime of existing is inherently violent and cruel. but my church didn't frame it like that. they framed it as "yes we're ALL evil and wicked and we ALL deserve hell to atone for our sin (being human) BUT god loves you despite you not deserving love or happiness or anything good at all and all you have to do to avoid the pits of hell is accept jesus as your savior isn't that so amazing????" and they framed the crucifixion as this beautiful, selfless act of god by taking our place on the cross instead of "this all-powerful being who created all the rules decided that he required torture, death, and human sacrifice to be able to tolerate us". and it's not "women will be viewed as lesser than men" it's "women must submit to their husbands the same way we all must submit to god it's not dehumanizing it's holy and yes women have different roles but that doesn't make them lesser than and sure we don't have any women in leadership positions in the church and we would never even consider it, come on now that's ridiculous, but that's just because men are supposed to lead because men and women are different and created for different purposes it's just biology". and there are plenty others! i know that the reframing of everything is part of how they can even get people to accept the doctrine in the first place, but being on the outside of it is kind of horrifying. when you get down to the actual beliefs that are held without the distortions and manipulation, so many are violent, cruel, dehumanizing, abusive. but they distort and manipulate these beliefs to make them seem acceptable, morally correct, and redefine what love is and should look like.

[ofswordsandpens]

Okay compiling my most critical opinions on the pjo show so far (episodes 1 & 2)

The Gods' Conflict, Foreshadowing, & Big Three Kids

The show has seemingly dropped a lot of the foreshadowing and threat regarding the gods impending war over the theft of the lightning bolt. In the book, Percy remarks about how the weather's been inexplicably weird and extreme. When he gets to camp everyone is on pins and needles about something and they don't want to talk about it but its still very present. By the time he's claimed as a son of Poseidon and everyone's like "oh fuck" and then Chiron finally explains to Percy that the gods think he's the lightning thief, everything clicks into place for the reader. It all makes sense why everything seems so wrong... because things are wrong. Meanwhile in the show, that doesn't carry through as much, so the reveal of the conflict between the gods and why that's a big deal falls flat in comparison imo.

They dropped/stalled the foreshadowing of the fates and the cutting of the string. They could very well include this in future episodes, and probably will, but I think the timing of it - Percy seeing this before he even knew he was a demigod - again carries some hefty significance and helped set the foreboding tone of things being wrong even from the beginning.

They did drop Zeus's attack on Percy in the minotaur battle completely, which does disappoint me. In the book, its lightning that blasts the car off the road. In the show, Sally seemingly loses control of the car. That change is pretty significant, because it's again losing the power of RR's foreshadowing in the book. The attack on Percy outside the camp borders was a duel attack from Zeus and Hades.

Finally, I don't like the changes they made to Percy's claiming scene, namely, the reaction from the rest of CHB. Percy being a son of Poseidon is a huge deal. When Percy's claimed, the attitude is very much begrudging reverence paired with genuine fear of what it means and what he represents. In the book, Percy is claimed. People gasp. Everyone kneels. Annabeth says, "This is really not good." In the show, Percy is claimed. People... stand there? Annabeth smiles - she's going to get her quest. The only person who has the most outright negative reaction is Luke. I won't go so far to say this is out of character for Annabeth, but it is focusing on an entirely different aspect of her character in the moment, and what the audience gets from Percy's claiming scene here, the tone, is now different from the book. Basically, the reverence and fear don't really carry across to the show, which I think is important.

The phrase "forbidden child" slaps tho.

2. Gabe's Characterization, Sally's Characterization, & Why the Changes do Make a Difference

I'm going to say this with great care: The show has absolutely depicted an abusive relationship between Sally and Gabe. The show has shown Sally to be a strong woman who would do anything for her child. The show has shown Gabe to be a controlling, toxic man.

What they have depicted in the show does not read like the characters and dynamic in the books.

Book Gabe is a violent, menacing drunk. He is so disgusting and vile that monsters avoid him. This is overwhelmingly apparent from the second Percy gets home in the book, even before he is aware of the physical abuse Sally has been facing. Percy has already been dealing with physical abuse from him, amongst other things (edit to be more specific: this is including verbal, emotional, & financial abuse). I've already spoke to it here, in-depth, so I'll try to keep it short but all of this has not been translated accurately to the screen. (Is this to say that a person must be overtly abusive to be abusive? No. But does this character on-screen feel like Smelly Gabe? No.) These things have shaped Percy (and Sally) in very specific ways. As others have mentioned: Percy cannot stand alcohol. He meets Dionysus and is reminded of his step-father. He gets to Tartarus and the air reminds him of Gabe.... The character on screen, while abusive, does not share this presence at all, and that makes a difference.

Edit: To emphasize once more, I am not saying that the show has not depicted a realistic portrayal of abuse. It has (verbal, emotional, & financial so far). It has also distinctly changed the tone and Gabe's presence from the book, to the extent that it no longer feels like the same character and that does have a rippling effect on the dynamics he shares with both Sally and Percy.

3. The Lack of Annabeth

Annabeth in the show is just like... really not as present as she is in the book so far, and I'm just kinda like, why lol?

Annabeth in the books is already way more involved in Percy's life. She was in the infirmary feeding Percy ambrosia after the attack (ulterior quest motives lol), she's the one who lead Percy around camp and re-explained godly parentage to him - and its a moment where she's very sincere with him, and even trying to help him! Instead these moments are given to Chiron and Luke, which I do get the merit of, but still, these were her moments!

Annabeth in the books had already surmised that the gods were fighting, something was stolen, and the something bad was going to happen, all before Percy had even been claimed. And she shared that with him! Again, the loss of foreshadowing and little bonding moments has me :(

I'm a little worried how they're going to deal with her crush on Luke because its pretty central to her character in the books! It helps Luke to manipulate her and also keeps her from admitting he's done something wrong. Also, it was very sweet and funny reading her get flustered - It drove home the point that she was just a kid with a crush that she didn't know how to handle. But in the show Luke spoke to her and I was expecting there to be some sort of reaction to it and there just... wasn't? (This is not something I'm laying at Leah's feet btw! Only the writers/directors!) We're only two episodes in tho so maybe we'll see it some more moving forward.

4. The Minotaur Battle

Again, I've already spoken about this in depth here but !!

The lack of Zeus's lightning strike, them all coming to a standstill and just chatting instead of running for their lives, Grover being awake and just sort of off to the side watching the fight, Sally being like "Promise Me Grover Swear it"... it all just doesn't ring right to me

I wanted more panic, more terror, more urgency. Higher stakes. I wanted Grover unconscious, I wanted to see Percy drag him into camp, and I wanted to see more of Percy's grief alongside his rage. Like the book did.

The pacing in the show here, and just overall, is weird

5. Other Stuff

Mrs. Dodds fight kind of fell flat too. It was honestly too sudden and Percy killing her in the show seemed even more accidental than in the book lol. Like, accidental impalement vs intentional swing of the sword.

They really had show Grover throw Percy to the wolves and not just gaslight him, but low-key have a part in getting him expelled? Not sure how I feel about it tbh.

More New York. I wish we had gotten the part of Percy taking the bus home with Grover included cause like? Him ditching Grover was funny, but it would have been the perfect opportunity to show Percy traveling through New York and establish it has his home. Shots of him looking at the city, walking the streets, interacting with people near his building.. yeah.

More Montauk too tbh. Like more shots of him and Sally on the beach rather than just the cabin.

Nectar and Ambrosia! Unless I missed it, which I might have, why have we still not gotten an onscreen depiction of it yet lmao.