#the victim and the executioner

[webanglikethat]

on Luke castellan: web weaving

maybe you weren’t a terrible person, maybe you were just a victim, trying to reclaim your existence. (yes, you chose a greater evil, but you just wanted to change the lives of others so they wouldn’t have to suffer like you did.) “give me back my girlhood, it was mine first.” “give them their childhood back, it was never yours to taint”

special tag: @helpallthenamesaretakensblog <3

[jasontoddsno1simp]

@jjaysontodd

Yeah, asks typically stay off because I've been on this hell site for ten years (made my first account back in 2013) and I've been subjected to some SHIT!!

Could be convinced to turn them on, though~

Anyway, the name of the game when it comes to Jason Todd is gaslight gatekeep girlboss, because there is no way in hell some of these bitches rly think he's as bad as they say he is. Especially when you compare his shenanigans to the shenanigans of characters like Bruce or even Tim.

Yes, he kills people. Yes, he can be pretty uncaring about the collateral of his plqns.

But guess what?!

SO IS EVERYONE ELSE!!

The only difference is that we, as Jason Todd enjoyers, know what we're here for.

As for the Helena stans and their beef with Jason, idk what to tell ya, mate. Well, other than it's madness, of course!!

There's definitely a convo to be had about male characters getting more space to be complex than female characters, but that's not what's going here. What's going on here is a treasure trove of fandom feminists have decided that Jason has far too many ~feminine~ traits and that he doesn't deserve to have the support he has within the fandom. Why they’ve come to this conclusion is so inane and idiotic, I refuse to dignify it with a response, but it’s that type of shit why I rly want us to go back to the days of decentralized fandom spaces. Spaces where mods actually had the power to cull and reject nonsense, before it started to spread like a virus. It wasn’t perfect (it bred an air of smug exclusivity that stank of unwashed ass), but it’s better than having to deal with assholes spreading liberal nonsense like”Jason Todd is a cop cause he kills and uses guns”.

As if cops are only dangerous because of the extra judicial killings and the apparatus most associated with them 😒😒😒

Anyway, I would bet money that most of those so called Helena stans don't even care about her like that as a character; they just hate Jason.

Which kinda sucks, cause I find Hintress - like all the Gotham vigilantes - to be fascinating characters. But my want to actually pursue any new info on her has been dead on arrival, because her stans are fucking assholes.

Bottom line, Jason’s story resonates with a lot of people. If you don’t get it or can’t bring yourself to understand, then like… Don’t. You don’t have to. The world would be so much better off if people learned that sometimes… the media you consume is just as personal as it what it says about you publicly.

[watermelinoe]

basically a thing that drives me insane w leftists who have a righteous cause is that they're no different from right-wingers bc they will also just lie. for no reason. and it feels like a psyop bc once you've very obviously lied abt something easily disproven, it gives your opposition the opportunity to say "they're lying about this, what else are they lying about?" (even if they are also liars which they probably are)

and 10000% of the time the lie didn't even need to be part of the argument, your moral argument was already sound, but now you're making everyone else complicit in a lie if they agree with you uncritically and if they point out that you're lying you accuse them of derailing and being against you

i have obsessive compulsive issues and i will dwell on this for hours trying to rationalize why people do this and if i'm a bad person bc i don't boost posts that i overall agree with except there's a blatant lie that i can't get past that imo undermines the entire message and i'm just like?? is it ignorance?? is it on purpose??

obv it's easy with like transactivists bc i already disagree with their ideology and on top of that they lie constantly, but never forget that leftists you agree with also do the same thing and they will get mad at you if you don't even if you say you agree with them overall

[ginkovskij]

thinking again about the common traits of dmitri karamazov and harrier du bois 🫠

[acknowledgetheabsurd]

Photo Credit: lightholder_books

[nicklloydnow]

November 19, 1946

Neither Victims nor Executioners

The Century of Fear

“The seventeenth century was the century of mathematics. The eighteenth century was the century of physical science, and the nineteenth the century of biology. Our twentieth century is the century of fear. Fear isn't a science, you may be thinking. Well, to begin with, science is no stranger to fear, since the latest theoretical advances have led science to repudiate itself, and since its practical applications threaten the entire earth with destruction. Furthermore, even if fear can't be considered a science in itself, there is no question that it is a method.

Indeed, what is most striking about the world we live in is first of all the fact that most people, broadly speaking, are deprived of any future (other than believers of one sort or another). No worthwhile life is possible without projection onto the future, without promise of development and progress. To live with one's back to a wall is a dog's life. But people of my generation and of the generation just now taking its place in factories and classrooms have lived and are living more and more like dogs.

Of course this is not the first time that people have faced a materially obstructed future. In the past, however, they used to overcome obstacles by speaking out or shouting out their discontent. They appealed to a different set of values, on which they pinned their hopes. Today, no one is talking (apart from those who repeat themselves), because the world seems to us to be led by forces blind and deaf to warnings, advice, and supplications. Something in us succumbed to recent experience. That something is man's eternal confidence, which always fostered the belief that we could elicit human reactions from other human beings by speaking to them in the language of humanity. We have witnessed lying, humiliation, killing, deportation, and torture, and in each instance it was impossible to persuade the people who were doing these things not to do them, because they were sure of themselves and because there is no way of persuading an abstraction, or, to put it another way, the representative of an ideology.

The long dialogue among human beings has now come to an end. And of course a man who cannot be persuaded is a man who makes others afraid. So that alongside people who stopped speaking because they deemed it pointless to try, a vast conspiracy of silence has arisen and continues to spread, a conspiracy accepted by those who quake in fear and who find every reason in the world to hide their quaking from themselves, and encouraged by those who find it in their interest to do so. "You must not talk about the purge of artists in Russia, because that would play into the hands of the reactionaries.” "You must keep silent about the British and American decision to keep Franco in power because to talk about it would play into the hands of communism." As I said earlier, fear is a method.

Between the very general fear of a war for which everyone is preparing and the very specific fear of lethal ideologies, it is therefore quite true that we live in terror. We live in terror because persuasion is no longer possible, because man has been delivered entirely into the hands of history and can no longer turn toward that part of himself which is as true as the historic part, and which he discovers when he confronts the beauty of the world and of people's faces. And because we live in a world of abstraction, a world of bureaucracy and machinery, of absolute ideas and of messianism without subtlety. We gasp for air among people who believe they are absolutely right, whether it be in their machines or their ideas. And for all who cannot live without dialogue and the friendship of other human beings, this silence is the end of the world.

In order to escape from this terror, we need to be able to think and to act on the basis of our thoughts. But the problem is that terror does not create a climate conducive to thinking. My view, however, is that rather than blame our fear, we should regard it as a basic element of the situation and try to remedy it. Nothing is more important, for this affects the fate of a large number of people in Europe, people who, having had enough of violence and lies, having seen their fondest hopes dashed, and being loath to kill their fellow human beings even in order to persuade them, are equally loath to see themselves persuaded in the same manner. Yet this is the dilemma that the vast masses of Europeans face, those who belong to no party or who are uncomfortable in the party they have chosen, who doubt that socialism has been achieved in Russia or liberalism in America, and yet acknowledge the right of people on both sides to assert their version of the truth while denying those same people the right to impose that truth by murder, either individual or collective. Among those who wield power today, these people are without a kingdom. They will be able to gain recognition for their point of view (without necessarily securing its triumph) and reclaim their homeland only when they can consciously formulate what they want and express this in terms simple enough and strong enough to bind a range of energies. And if fear is not the right climate for proper reflection, then they must first come to terms with fear.

In order to come to terms with fear, we need to understand what it signifies and what it rejects. It signifies and rejects the same fact: a world in which murder is legitimate and human life is considered futile. Therein lies today's primary political problem. Before dealing with the rest, we have to take a position on this. Before we can build anything, we need to ask two questions: "Yes or no, directly or indirectly, do you want to be killed or assaulted? Yes or no, directly or indirectly, do you want to kill or assault?” Anyone who answers yes to these questions is automatically caught up in a web of consequences that is bound to change the way in which the problem is posed. My aim is to detail just two or three of those consequences. In the meantime, honest readers may wish to ask themselves these questions and answer them.”

[ficmeouttahere]

see i'm all judgy of elle (love u girl)

but if i was in the bau i would've simply killed foyet and scratch

no remorse no regrets no morals questioned

[incorrect-web-novels]

Idk if I've complained about this on here before, but it drives me up the fucking walls how male isekai stories mainly have the protagonist doing and accomplishing great things in the "outside world" while female isekai stories have the protagonist healing from past trauma and/or dealing with family matters (even political dealings)... like, even if the female protagonists are in the public sphere, it reeks of "public vs. domestic spheres" and "women belong in the kitchen/home. "

[deadrlngers]

felt like finally writing that piece where violante kills ruven and forms the pact with her patron and i swear the things this piece is doing to my brain are fantastic

(next one is slightly gore-y sorry)

they are best friend, they hate each other, they are everything the other has, they are nothing, they are the you are the knife i turn inside myself

[lorddeathofmurdermountain]

Had some genius try to explain to me how the Executioners were the bad guys and how the Vilebloods were victims. Oh, cry me a river. Why yes, those poor, murderous vampire wannabes, how sad that they won't be able to continue their mindless slaughter of innocent people due to the horrid purge committed by the thoroughly fucking brainwashed Executioners. How tragic that their butchery of hunters and common people alike, fueled only by their sick, demented pleasure, only "excused" by needing to give Blood Dregs to their Queen, has been cut short.

Go home and acquire some Insight, dumbass.

[ananke-xiii]

Sam luring that Lester Guy in s10 while the man is possibly a bit drunk and in his feelings into a "situation" that doesn't go as planned (although Sam of all people should know that you need to come prepared when dealing with demons) but that he nevertheless uses for his own benefit gives me all the right flashbacks to Crowley doing exactly the same to Dean in s9 when he picks him up from a bar and secretly leads him into Cain's trap. And I'm living for the Sam-Crowley parallel that we could have had for more than, like, three episodes but that was stopped too soon imo (although Rowena will substitute Crowley in Sam's story so I totally don't complain too much).

(which also means that Dean is the Lester Guy in this story therefore when Demon!Dean kills him is also a Sad Face Moment because he's killing himself too and while Lester Guy said and did horrible things he was preyed upon when he was vulnerable just like Dean was and I'm actually sorry for all the flies that get trapped in the Winchesters' web, hello Tara from s9 I won't forget you).

[tenth-sentence]

Is he a victim or an executioner?

"20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" - Jules Verne

[saintvampe]

“…isn’t it enough that i am / your death? what else should bother us? / ‘doom’ i said. ‘doom means judgement’… / the dead do not know judgement..”

[zamalie]

Didn't want to add anymore to my tags on last rb but on the topic of people aggressively characterizing cheaters as Infinitely Punishable beyond the point of reason I once read a story of like. A very young woman who cheated on a bf who was like a decade older than her. And TEN YEARS LATER he continued to stalk and harass her and wreck her new relationships by messaging the guys "warning" them. Dude was married to a new woman and still obsessively doing this

And a majority of the dipshit commenters were fully on the dude's side telling her she "shouldn't have cheated" like. You are out of your fucking mind and your own personal hurt doesn't justify a decade's worth of trauma to another person

[cinemaquiles]

FILMES BASEADOS EM FATOS REAIS DISPONÍVEIS NO YOUTUBE E STREAMING E QUE VALEM A PENA CONFERIR

[halalchampagnesocialist]

One thing that really pisses me off about discourse re: when certain political figures die/are killed etc is that when a legitimately evil person from the West dies, so many liberals (individuals and politicians alike) do the whole “we didn’t always agree but sad to hear about their passing! Condolences to their family”

But when it’s a person from a non-western country, especially part of a group they don’t like, they act like they were one of the most evil people alive. The point here isn’t so much whether the person was actually evil or not but it’s the glaring double standards and the disrespect / lack of care for those victims.

It also brings me to that point where countries like the US/Israel and some others feel like they can be judge, jury and executioner in order to avenge the deaths of their own civilians/military who were killed and get “justice” in return but these same countries are rarely held to account for their imperialist activities and their many thousands of victims are just killed in vain and continue to be killed without any justice.