#their dynamic is so complex and interesting

[the-omegaverse-analyzer]

Let’s talk about the breeding scale.

I have my own opinions about how the scale would work in a world that I’d make personally, but I want to think about this from an unbiased lens and look at the different ways different versions of the scale might affect an omegaverse-based society.

So let’s say that ‘traditionally,’ the scale works like this. I’m approaching this strictly from a binary lens (Besides Betas) because getting more complex than that should be its own post.

Gender designations that CAN get pregnant:

- Omega Female

- Beta Female

Gender designations that CANNOT get pregnant:

- Beta Male

- Alpha Male

Notably missing from this list are ‘Alpha Female,’ and ‘Omega Male’ because that’s the topic I want to tackle here.

Obviously, this is the foundation omegaverse is built on.

Typically, Alpha Female is lumped in with the ‘CANNOT’ crowd, and Omega Male with the ‘CAN’ crowd.

Omegaverse stories and related posts frequently explore the biological differences between the bodies of these two designations and IRL bodies, prompting some questions:

What is biologically different between an Alpha Female and an IRL Female?

For example: Does a functional uterus exist in a Female Alpha, implying that they can become pregnant? Do Female Alphas experience a menstrual cycle? How is it different than an IRL menstrual cycle? Do they experience a rut that Male Alphas traditionally experience in Omegaverse? If they experience both, what is that process like? Can they impregnate someone in the CAN group? What does that process look like? What biological systems are in place to allow them to do that, and how is it different from an IRL Female?

Similarly, what is biologically different between an Omega Male and an IRL Male? And in that list of earlier questions, what are the corresponding things regarding traditionally Male anatomy?

These types of questions are explored in a lot of fics, and I’m always interested to see the diversity of responses to them and what they mean in the context of an individual fic. It says a lot about the creativity of an author to break “traditional rules” or in general to explore ideas that exist outside of a mirror structure to our current society.

For example:

Authors who explore intersex identities among both Alpha Females and Omega Males, placing them in a BOTH category outside of the CAN and CANNOT groups.

What I am ALSO, perhaps even MORE interested in is

What are the sociological differences of a world where Alpha Females are part of the CANNOT crowd, and the Omega Males are part of the CAN crowd?

For example, does the designation of Alpha and Omega attach itself to a social hierarchy? If so, is it a patriarchal structure where Alphas are given more power? What about a matriarchal structure where Omegas are given more power? Are there population differences that make certain combinations of gender and secondary gender minorities? What do different arrangements of those minorities imply for a broader societal structure? Are there perhaps alternate terms given to a population that breeds mostly one designation or another like “Alpha-centric” as a term for a society structure where Alphas hold the most social power? Overall, what is the relationship between Secondary gender and Power?

These types of dynamics I find particularly interesting and are some additional questions I’d like to explore more of on this blog.

Feel free to reblog or comment with your own takes and thoughts!

[elpeadro]

Oh crap. In all your worldbuilding of Starry Night Hymnal, the religious aspect never crossed my mind. But yeah, it would make for some conflict between the trio if you wanted to go that route!

Poor Marcy has been indoctrinated into thinking she's an ordained sacrifice/future host for the Core, and that this is good and what she is 'meant for'. Plus, depending on how you handle her relationship with the Core (as chapter 7 of SNH establishes that she's used to going down in the basement to the Core), you might have it feeding her whispers in the back of her head to reinforce said indoctrination about her being a special sacrifice for it, and it being a god she is meant to serve. Naturally, this goes very poorly with the other two for a variety of reasons.

Meanwhile Anne is straight chilling, relatively speaking. Yeah, she's got all of her issues from Hop Pop and Wartwood treating her as they have, but hey, at least there's no religious guilt or trauma going on! Just general parentification and moral guilt. :)

And then there's Sasha, who I think is very open-ended in this topic and kind of the most interesting of the trio? She's obviously aware of the significane of toad saints and that Barrel is the most important one, and she's grown up embedded in toad culture, but also...I do wonder how attached she is to all of it. How much she buys into all of it.

Like, her and Grime's dynamic is very fraught and complex, and she lacks that parental figure type whom she trusts to bring her into this kind of religious stuff like Marcy does with Andrias and Anne would with Hop Pop if the frogs had a religion.

(I know there's Percy and Braddock, but also I can see Sasha being emotionally stunted and defiant enough that she just refuses to buy into the toad saints stuff on principle.)

Which then leads into the very fun part of the story where after she usurps Grime at the Southern Toad Tower, she (presumably) cements her claim to power by pulling Barrel's warhammer out of the narwhal worm and slaying the legendary beast that killed the toads' most important saint, annoiting herself as Barrel's chosen and the lord of al toads. And she may be an abominaton in the eyes of toads like Aldo, but also, what can they really do when she's invoking the name and image of Saint Barrel the Brave??

Then the question becomes: how much is Sasha buying into her own hype?

Obviously, she's going to play into the narrative because the toads believe in their religion, and reinforcing that image and narrative keeps herself safe and in control. (This, of course, makes her control issues and relationship with power all the worse.) But then does she start to genuinely believe it as time goes on?

Alternatively, if Sasha does believe in the toad religion from the start, then her claiming Barrel's warhammer creates a power complex bad enough to rival the Leviathans.

Like, she and Marcy would be in the same boat of being intimately connected and important to their religious figures, but whereas Marcy is reminded and groomed to be subservient, a sacrifice, and to not really grow an ego or go beyond her station (if I'm remembering correctly from your other lore posts), Sasha is enabled to do whatever she wants because Barrel isn't around to talk to her, Grime has been deposed, and she's the most powerful Toad Lord with a religious-like air surrounding her. To quote Homelander: she can do whatever the fuck she wants.

Just the worst I'm god's special soldier so I can do no wrong :) energy.

The fact that the frogs of frog valley believe in no gods vs. The fact that toads are heavily religious and have many toad saints vs. The fact that the Leviathans believe themselves to be artificial demigods secretly worshipping their own artificial god... the religious conflict there makes the Order of the Olm's simple animism seem normal.

[welcometogrouchland]

[ID in ALT] I've made posts before about Talia/Dick co-parenting Damian moments (will never happen but let me dream) and this came to me in a vision. Took me ages to finish for some reason 😭 and then even longer to post

[alwaysagathario]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that there’s something about Agatha that feels deeply attuned to things beyond the surface, like she has an instinct for realness. And I believable that, even if she didn’t understand it at first, she felt something in Rio that she had never felt before upon first meeting her. Maybe it wasn’t instant trust, but it was recognition—like looking into a mirror and seeing something she didn’t even know she was searching for.

And I think it’s even more beautiful how their relationship must have evolved. Agatha, who was so used to being let down, had to unlearn her instinct to push people away. And Rio, despite being Death, had to learn how to love someone who wasn’t afraid of her.

[itadooori]

s2 gihun with s1 characters PLEASE

wait i love this concept omfg

[queer-heretic]

you are so correct, that is infuriating! people have so many incorrect perceptions about the middle ages and medieval christianity and it’s so frustrating. like you said, there has been a lot of harm done by the church, and there was structural oppression of women, and we can’t ignore that, but it’s so much more complex than that! being a nun actually afforded medieval women much more freedom in the realm of education and involving oneself in writing and theology than was offered to women outside of the church! nunneries and christian mysticism (where women used medieval stereotypes about women’s nature as more “emotional” and associated with the body to assert their own unique relationship with God) are a big reason we have a lot of these amazing writings and records of medieval religious women, particularly the ones that are in their own words!

fundamentally, you cannot remove christianity from The Interior Castle. even if you take out the specific references to God and change the wording, it is a fundamentally christian text! she worked in a christian society and theological framework!!! you are fundamentally disrespecting her by altering her writing because you think it’s “better” your way! you are no different than the (historically documented) men who altered medieval religious women’s works because they thought they knew better than them!

not to go off the rails here, but i also agree with what you said about how the new age movement constantly does this, it’s something that i have a lot of thoughts about. it’s very interesting in that the movement tries to create a secular spiritual framework, disconnected from any particular religion (in practice i’d argue that a majority of the movement comes directly from wicca, but that’s another ramble). this inherently creates dynamics that cause cultural appropriation - because they are pulling from different traditions, but discarding the religious and spiritual beliefs inherent to whatever specific practice they’re using to “secularize” it. inherently, this is pretty disrespectful! it’s just that people don’t notice/care until it comes to a living religion/culture because then they (or people of that culture) notice. for christian-based practices (though it’s a living religion), it flies under the radar because most new-age practitioners come from a majority-christian culture, so christian influences are just “normal” to them. also, this is just fundamentally Not how religion and spirituality have historically worked! people did not divide the practice and the belief! the belief is the cause of the practice, and the “why” by which it is supposed to work!

this causes a lot of new age practices to break down when you critically examine them. this symbol is good for this thing -> why? there is no answer. the real answer is that the association came from a particular tradition, but they’ve filed off the serial numbers. it works because we agree it works, essentially. there are ways you can work that sort of reasoning into a coherent spiritual framework, but the vast majority of people do not do that.

Found a copy of the Interior Castle by St Teresa of Avila that advertised "removing the religious dogma from her writings" sorry but that's insane and misogynistic as hell. Teresa was a nun. Interior Castle was written for a cloistered order of nuns. Removing the "religious dogma" doesn't make sense especially in this context. Why are people so obsessed with stripping female saints of their religion? Going as far as to censor and rewrite a woman's writing because it doesn't fit your standard is disgusting.

People are so so weird about religious women. I don't know if I've ever seen the writings of a male saint be censored in this way. Trying to package this censorship as some kind of feminist move is crazy. I've seen people do this to St.Joan of Arc and St. Hildegard of Bingen. If these women were alive today we would 100% consider them conservative and they would be horrified if they saw the way people were stripping away a massive part of their lives.

Respecting women includes respecting their writings and respecting their religious beliefs. It would have been more than okay for this author to write her OWN book about her OWN takeaways from the Interior Castle. Censoring religious text is an insane way to go about it and it's why I do not like the New Age spiritual movement. That entire movement is about appropiating different religions from around the world with no respect given to them. It's more than okay to read the religious writings of someone if you're not in their religion! You don't have to change it. If the religiousity is too uncomfortable for you, there's so many wonderfully written secular books out there to read.

This hits too close to home for me, I'm a writer. If someone went in and removed the religious aspects of my short stories I would be devastated. I recognize the misogynistic history of the Church, but I also recognize that for these women, religion was the most important part of their lives. Removing that from a woman's writing suggests a lack of respect for her autonomy. It says "This woman doesn't know what she's talking about, I do!". The fact that it was another woman who did this is even more disheartening.

It's a symptom of this broader issue where people act like religious women were these passive little girls who were blindly following their priests. All 3 of the women mentioned were considered rebels in their time. Teresa was told she was being possessed and that her visions of Christ were of the devil. Hildegard was accused of being a witch because she mixed herbal and crystal healing with her faith. We all know what happened to poor Joan of Arc. Removing their religion from their story only pleases the people from their time who rejected or attempted to eject these women from Catholicism. You are doing exactly what those priests and bishops wanted.

[girlrandomstuff]

No one will convince me that Effie wasnt kidnaped by the Capitol as a punishment for Haymitch.

That's why she didn't get killed right of (like Cinna, Portia and Peeta's prep team) because keeping them alive, like they did with Peeta and Annie, would mean more pain to Katniss and Finnick.

[casscainmainly]

"My long-held belief that Duke and Luke should not get along" <- could you please elaborate on this? I'm fond of both and I collect your thoughts and analyses like they're rare trading cards so I'm ready to be all 👀🫳🍿

First of all anon this might be my favourite ask ever, I've been dying to write my thoughts on these two so THANK YOU. Secondly my belief that Duke + Luke wouldn't get along actually stemmed from WFA, I was super annoyed with Luke giving Duke the pep talk in ep 76 because they have no relationship!!! Then I started thinking harder and realised they are a really interesting pair. In case anyone hasn't noticed I'm fond of giving Duke relationships where he's annoyed with the other person so 😭 this is very on brand.

The thing about Duke + Luke is they are, on the surface, similar - they are Black members of the Batfam who operate mostly independently, 'separate' from a legacy as Signal/Batwing (though I will deconstruct this later), devoted to their family, have a strong sense of justice, and view crime-fighting as a business. But I believe at their cores they are fundamental opposites - and it's this hidden opposition that makes me think they wouldn't vibe with each other. I'm focusing on We Are Robin Duke and Batwing Luke, though I will also refer to Duke's Signal days + Luke in Detective Comics.

(This is going to be a long post because this is lowkey my Luke + Duke thesis 😭)

Introductions

Duke and Luke were both introduced in the New 52, actually in the same year (2013!). What's really cool about their intros is that you already see how different they are. We first meet Duke in Zero Year, where he's fishing in the subway and then attacked by a gang; we then get the famous scene of him solving crosswords by Bruce's unconscious body. When Bruce tells Duke and his family to leave, Duke refuses, telling him they can't leave Duke's grandma and that all it takes is one riddle to free the city from Riddler's influence.

By contrast, we first meet Luke in the spotlight as he's wrestling for MMA in Batwing #19. He's been wrestling to get Batman's attention, refusing all job offers from his dad to do so (and thus creating some juicy father-son tension). In Batwing #20, we see he has two degrees from MIT, lives in a fancy apartment, and is really tech-oriented; his cover story for Batwing is that he's travelling the world.

Already, there are a couple things that already firmly separate them:

Class: Duke is from the Narrows whereas Luke is rich

Connection to Batman: Duke stumbled across Batman and gained his attention quite organically, whereas Luke was actively begging for Batman to notice him

Agency: Duke's actions were motivated by the extreme circumstances of Zero Year and a desire to help rooted in his material environment, whereas Luke's is a more internal, abstract wish to help (pointing to their class differences again)

Gotham: Duke refuses to leave his city, whereas Luke immediately packs up and travels the world

Intelligence: Both of them are fiercely intelligent, but in different ways - Duke loves puzzles and riddles whereas Luke is more inclined towards engineering and technology

And these differences only grow as they get older!!

Maturity

Duke is 16 (in my head, canonically it's vague but he's between Damian and Tim so 14-17) and Luke is 23. This age gap is honestly not that big, but I think it would feel big to both of them. And what's worse is that Duke is quite mature, but Luke is said to be immature:

Batwing #23

I don't think Luke is actually immature, but it's a recurring theme that other characters perceive him as unwilling to grow up; and I genuinely do think Batwing, for him, is kind of an adventure at first. Now compare this to Duke, whose circumstances disallowed him being childish. He had to grow up because his parents weren't around anymore, and he became quite jaded as a result. Even after he's mellowed out in his Signal days, I still don't think he could tolerate working with someone who comes off as light-hearted as Luke does. Duke would be annoyed by how he perceives Luke doesn't take things seriously, and Luke in turn would be annoyed when Duke inevitably criticises him for it.

Arc

Following on from above, their arcs are actually in total opposite directions. We first meet Duke alone and disillusioned with everything, putting his whole being into finding his parents. Then, through We Are Robin and Robin War, he begins to understand what Robin means as a symbol and finds community, leading to his brighter personality in Signal comics. Luke, however, begins very light-hearted (as seen above), with a huge respect for Batman and the Bat symbol. Once his family starts being torn apart, though, he becomes increasingly aggressive, more isolated, and in a much darker place. Compare a narration box from the last issues of both:

Batwing #34 / We Are Robin #12

These encapsulate their journeys: Duke learns that he doesn't have to act alone, whereas Luke struggles with accepting all that has happened since he put on his suit. Being a vigilante improves Duke's life, whereas it essentially ruins Luke's. This is why I don't think that WFA ep made sense!!! They have nothing in common in terms of the vigilante experience, and I think they would frustrate each other because they have such different conceptions of what the vigilante life is!!!!!!!

Batman and Robin

Okay so I said that Luke + Duke aren't legacies; even though Batwing is one, Luke doesn't actually talk to David Zavimbe, and his Batwing is not spiritually connected to David's really. But Luke and Duke both do take inspiration from other Batfam members - Batman and Robin, respectively.

Batwing #25 / Batman (2011) #45

Luke is the rare Batfam member whose motivations don't spring from tragedy - he's inspired one night when Batman saves him and he jumps in to help. Luke's love for Batman is wrapped up in Bruce himself, as a person rather than a symbol; he genuinely thinks Batman is awesome and wants to help people under his name.

Duke is the exact opposite - Robin is not a person for him but a symbol, and a symbol that can be spread to many people. It's also intimately tied with Duke's relationship to Gotham, because Batman is "on the gargoyle" and Robin is "on the street". Importantly, Duke says to Darryl that "I know you work for him, but you're us". Working for a singular person is in opposition to this 'us' that Duke believes in.

Luke, though not exactly an employee, literally wanted to work for Batman, Inc. Batwing is in many ways a 'job', an alternative to the corporate life Lucius wanted for him. Duke would, I think, take huge problems with Luke's philosophy as a whole. Separated from Gotham, attached to Batman as a person rather than as a symbol, Duke just literally wouldn't understand where Luke is coming from. And Luke, too, doesn't seem to respect Robin as a mantle (this is after someone mistakes him for Batman in Batwing #34):

I think Luke views Robin as firmly a kids' role, a sidekick for Batman; that would annoy the STUFFING out of Duke. I actually could write a whole post in itself about this incident and Luke being mistaken for Batman but that's for another day. The point is they are attached to the Batman and Robin legacies which in themselves are already vastly different, but Duke is kind of anti-Batman and Luke is a little anti-Robin, so they would not mix.

Family

One thing they do have in common is a deep love for family. But even then, their familial relationships are extremely different: Duke has a wonderful relationship with his parents, bolstered by the fact he lost them for a while, whereas Luke has a contentious relationship with his. Duke in some ways idealises his mom and dad, while Luke is sharply aware of his parents' shortcomings.

Batwing #20

Now this wouldn't be an issue normally, but Duke canonically has, like, a problem with judging other people's families. It's a really consistent (and somewhat hilarious) trait of his:

We Are Robin #5 / We Are Robin #5 / Gotham Nights #8

The Dre comment ("you're a mob kid?") is particularly telling. Because Duke has such a good relationship with his parents, and because he's shaped so much by them, I think he sees children as reflections of their parents/families. It's hard for him to see someone completely divorced from their family - you even see this a bit in Batman & The Outsiders, where although Duke understood Cass' disagreements with Shiva, I don't think he really got the nuances of what that felt like for Cass.

Luke's relationship with his father is complex and contentious. They love each other, but Lucius' desires for Luke just don't match what Luke wants, and Luke can't tell him about Batwing either so it's a constant back-and-forth. This secrecy is another thing Duke wouldn't get - I've made posts before about Duke and honesty, and it's a huge value of his. It's significant that as soon as his mom is healed she finds out about Signal; dishonesty is not really a factor in Duke's life, whereas it is Luke's central conflict. Luke's entire thing with his dad and his alter ego is something Duke has never had to deal with, and I think Duke would just be like 'tell him?? and make up??' and Luke would sigh so loud and hard.

Personality and Authority

But all of that aside, I just think their personalities wouldn't mix! Duke is a jaded teenager whose overt honesty and resistance to authority often give off a bad first impression (see his first encounters with Black Lightning, We Are Robin, Damian, even the Bruce train scene...). People do warm up to Duke quick, and once you love him you adore him, but there's a hurdle to becoming close to him that you have to leap first.

Luke, on the other hand, is affable and immediately likable. He's popular in school (as Russell mentions in #25), has experienced college social life, and is open and friendly. I think in an initial meeting Luke would find Duke off-putting and rude, while Duke would find Luke shallow and annoying. Luke is an extremely confident person, as shown in both Batwing and Detective Comics (particularly the latter). I think Duke would take this confidence as him being stuck-up, especially because Luke is rich.

Their class differences also separate their reactions to authority. Luke doesn't take authority at face value - he disobeys Bruce basically as much as Duke does. However, given his upbringing he isn't that anti-authority. Compare Luke and Duke's attitudes to cops:

Batwing #25 / We Are Robin #2

The Luke narration box is after the cops shoot him and accidentally make him kill his best friend 😭😭😭 like if that had happened to Duke his inner voice would NOT say that. This is another example of how their different upbringings and personalities cause them to have DRASTICALLY different outlooks on things. Batwing also sides with Batwoman when she kills Clayface in Detective Comics, something I think Duke would not do (he would've sided with Cass) so their ideologies often put them on opposite sides.

FINALLY, and least importantly, Luke is not a reader. This is a recurring thing and it's so funny:

Batwing #21

That's Tam telling Luke to "read a book". I think this exact interaction would happen with Duke taking the place of Tam, where he'd just be super annoyed that Luke doesn't enjoy literature. Honestly I think Duke might remind Luke of Tam in a lot of ways, since Duke is Bruce's golden child just like Tam is Lucius'. And that would annoy Luke, like he can't escape annoying younger siblings even as Batwing?? Bruce liking Duke more than Luke, even when Duke doesn't even care for Bruce's approval, would send Luke's blood pressure through the ROOF.

Conclusion

Um anyway I'm so so sorry this was so long but that's why I think Luke and Duke wouldn't get along!! It's mostly that they have such different outlooks on literally everything and their personalities clash. Anyway, if anyone bothered to read til the end here's your reward!! A little edit of what SHOULD have happened in WFA ep 76:

[deadpoetsandlivinglegends]

Something something every time Charlie isn’t fighting to be the center of attention, he is always looking around to others to gauge their reactions and silently observing them all something something he is searching for connection, to fit in and be loved but he doesn’t know how to ask for love so instead he gains their attention by acting out in ways he knows they’ll notice and tries to pretend their attention and love are the same thing

[jeroidk]

*The fandom engaging in dadbastian discourse*

*Sebastian's canon reaction to being called "father" by Ciel*:

[shorthaltsjester]

it is quite funny to me as someone who studies philosophy and has had to have the conversations that bh and ludinus have been having many times over and often with people who like ludinus do not have any reading comprehension and truly like. the notion of “this shouldn’t exist” is almost always one that comes up regardless of whether it’s a discussion on the metaphysics of a potential God(s) or divinity, high political powers, or vehicles of systemic oppression. and what anyone who cares about people more than their ideals (even, sometimes, ideals that started out being about people but quickly come to be about the ideals themselves) realizes very quickly in a philosophical discussion about what should and shouldn’t exist is that it does not matter if what you’ve decided ‘shouldn’t’ exist does in fact already exist. like that tends to be the difference between sociopolitical philosophy that actually has teeth and substance in the world — a willingness to engage with the world as it is, not as it should be. because you can have the perfect image of a just and wonderful future world, but if you do not at every step reckon with the unjust world from which you are aiming at that future, you’re doing nothing. ideals are helpful because they aim us toward goals and hopes, but they’re nothing without a reality that grounds them.

and so people like ludinus, who in the real world would play the role of a graduate student with critical thinking skills that make every professor he comes across question how he arrived at his level of study, they don’t have Wrong ideals, there’s obviously plenty of reasons why an exandria without gods might in fact be a better place for mortals (there are also many Many reasons why it would not). but ludinus has also chosen his ideals to weigh heavier than the mortals he claims to uphold them with. i think ashton is also interesting, because i think a lot of their positions have a fun fluctuation between being ideal focused and person focused, where sometimes they’re focused on how unfair life is in a very nihilistic position, and at other times they seem quite clear about how much ideals help no one if they’re not second to the desire to help others. and i think that made their role in the convo with ludinus in 102 especially interesting and irritating (but in a narratively fulfilling way). anyway, truly so fun watching ludinus argue with the amount of fallacies and undeserved confidence of like right wing first year students in an ethics class explaining how actually the ends justify the means and thanos had the right idea actually if it means no more starvation. get a grip old man.

[potatobugz]

Tough Love

[pistashxo]

tryna get a feel for their likeness

[crynburne]

stw is a tibetan mastiff and in this essay i will share my 13 reasons why (cus this guy's been plaguing my mind lately) (and also cus hyj is canonically a black cat, shj is for some reason a snow leopard (i get it but like how did the community unilaterally agree on this?? it never fails to fascinate me) and stw is? maybe a bear? or a dog? no one decided yet)

anyway some stuff about tibetan mastiffs that fit my agenda perfectly first:

they are huge and look intimidating. i mean look at them.

they were initially bred to protect livestock from wolves, bears and snow leopards (!), not hunt (also it looks like even despite it's large build, a TM is weaker than a snow leopard, and usually just tries to scare or hold them off in an encounter)

they are loyal yet independent, and will not usually look for guidance from their owner

they are surprisingly agile for their huge size

they don't bark much, but their voices are very deep and impressive

they're children friendly (if you teach them properly, that is. but still!)

now onto novel reasons:

shj refers to stw as a shepherd god, mainly in the earlier chapters

stw's whole 'i must protect the weak sheep' thing he got going on

stw and shj are often pit against each other or look something like rivals (like TMs and snow leopards, basically each other's natural enemies). there is also another reason in the novel that I won't spoil, but if you finished it you know.

also yes a TM is weaker than a snow leopard. and stw is weaker than shj (that's also because shj is shj and there aren't many people stronger than him, but you get my point! suspend your disbelief and let me brainwash you!)

stw considers himself a monster, and both he and TMs look intimidating and scary. but both TMs and stw are ultimately like this to protect what's important to them and they don't go out of their way to pick fights or measure strengths.

TMs don't usually attack people out of nowhere, but since they're really territorial they will attack if they consider you an enemy. and s classes had a whole thing about hyj trying to appear as weak and needing protection in stw's eyes so he won't be seen as a threat to stw's little herd that is korea

anyway that's just about it. i kinda just saw a casual geographic vid about dog breeds that could put you to eternal rest and when he was talking about TMs beef with snow leopards i was like. wow hi stw. so now i consider this whole thing canon. uh thank you for coming to my ted talk i have no life!

[slankyyy-vs-the-world]

i think these two could be interesting

[rampaging-lolitaholic]

i lowkey ship aqua hoshino with the director from oshinoko. if they didn't want this to be the case they wouldn't have petnames for each other

(i can't find any images with the director with teenage aqua 💔)