#there are more but they're way worse if you can believe it

[sage-nebula]

In my personal opinion, all three of these have a high probability of backfiring. They assume that the person you're interacting with knows your intention, and/or is interacting in good faith, but on the chance that isn't true (and there is a good chance there isn't), all this will do is escalate the situation and make it worse.

To explain in detail:

"Are you okay?" — This comes across as incredibly passive-aggressive and patronizing if it's said in response to someone who is, by all appearances, in fine health. Particularly if the person you're speaking with is already in a hostile mood, they won't read this as concern, but rather as mockery, and it WILL further escalate the situation. Further, the HR representative has every opportunity here to put their own feelings into what you meant: did you have genuine reason to believe your coworker was in distress? Or were you passive-aggressively insinuating you believed they were deranged? Because the coworker believes the latter and that's why they reported you (after yelling even more in response to you passive-aggressively calling them crazy).

"Could you repeat that for me?" / "Can you explain what you mean?" — Playing dumb can work if, and only if, the coworker is genuinely not an asshole. However, some people are. And these people will see these questions and repeat / explain themselves in an even more condescending, insulting way: slowed down speech, over-enunciated sounds, little words. Now, you could get them with HR even harder for this, but you're taking a hit first.

So, what should you say instead? Here is your step-by-step guide.

Step 1: Acknowledge Their Issue — This is NOT the same as apologizing. If you genuinely did something wrong, by all means, but if you didn't, don't claim responsibility for something you didn't do! Here is a good stock response: "I understand where you're coming from, and see how that would be frustrating."

This acknowledges their feelings, which is an important step in deescalation. Even assholes often just want to be heard and validated. However, we are not done. IF the asshole doesn't deflate after having their feelings soothed, you'll need to move onto Step 2. (You can also lead right into Step 2 if this is all through email or Teams.)

Step 2: State Need for Professionalism — In this step you both stand up for yourself, and make it explicitly clear what your intentions are, in a way that cannot be misconstrued. Here is a stock phrase: "I feel that this conversation has become a bit heated. I ask that we remain polite and professional for the remainder of this discussion."

Using "I feel" language removes any chance that the coworker can say you accused them of anything. You aren't insinuating that they're crazy or anything like that, but rather just saying that your perception is that this conversation is heated. You are also asking for polite professionalism, which is an expectation of the workplace, but in such a way that it CANNOT be twisted into an accusation (but that YOU know is commentary on your coworker, and your coworker will understand as well, without being able to use it against you).

But we're still not done! If they continue to bluster and storm, Step 3 has got you.

Step 3: End the Convo, Involve Higher-Up — In this step you both disengage the rude coworker, and cover your ass (CYA). Here is a stock phrase: "Apologies, but I do not feel that continuing this conversation will be productive for either of us. I will see if we can resume this conversation with [manager / HR] present. Good day."

Saying that you don't feel the conversation is productive communicates the message that they are not communicating effectively, but once again in a way that cannot be twisted into an attack on their person. Furthermore, "productive" carries the connotation that YOU are interested in working with this person, which will look good to whichever higher-up you involve next.

Because at this point, you DO need to involve one. This is to CYA. Controlling the narrative is crucial in workplace disputes and that means being the first to report the situation. Pick whoever is most appropriate; if you and the coworker share a manager, you can go there. If not, HR would be the better bet. Even if you share a manager, you can still go to HR if you trust them more. It's up to you.

If this confrontation took place in person, walk away after saying this and go to either manager / HR to explain the situation. If the coworker tries to stop you, just repeat that you don't feel the conversation is productive and request that they move out of your way. Such a thing will attract attention, so it's important you seem as reasonable as possible while they make themselves look worse.

If this confrontation took place over email, immediately forward with an explanation of what they will be looking at. Here is a good template:

"Hi [Manager / HR name],

I wanted to bring to your attention a conversation [Coworker] and I just had, in case it has potential for further issues to arise. The conversation was initially about [situation], however, I feel that [Coworker]'s language was disrespectful and not conducive to a working relationship. I would appreciate it if you would review the situation and speak to [Coworker] on my behalf, since I do not wish for this incident to escalate further. Every email between [Coworker] and myself is included in the chain below.

Thank you,

[Your Name]"

This template accomplishes several things:

It alerts the manager / HR person to the fact that there is an issue.

Provides context as to why the issue happened.

Does not seem accusatory toward the coworker; accusations will work against you 9 times out of 10.

Places emphasis on wanting to maintain professionalism and productivity, which are things both managers and HR people also want.

Asks M / HR to take over the situation.

Provides the full conversation (i.e. the RECEIPTS) so they can see what went down.

By this point you might be thinking, "These sound like robot responses! Why do I need to include lines about professionalism and productivity? Why do I need to weasel around accusations?"

The reason to all of these is: this is how you both play and win the game. You're not in this to dunk on your rude coworker; you're in it to shut them down. And the way to do that is to be clear, specific, and get / keep management and HR on your side. That means getting to them first, and keeping yourself sounding reasonable in contrast to your asshole coworker. Stating intentions clearly means your words can't be used against you; using words like professionalism and productivity will make M / HR believe you really care about this workplace.

This is how you win. Trust me. (Source: Master's in communications management, mid-level managerial experience, and over a decade of experience deescalating and dealing with assholes in the workplace.)

Tips and ideas for how to respond when someone is being rude to you

For personal reasons I won't get into, I have a history of just freezing when some is rude / hostile / aggressive / condescending / patronizing / etc. It's obviously not something I'm happy about at all, most people who freeze or fawn aren't happy about it and would change it if they could.

One day I confided in my co-worker, a middle aged woman in her 50's, that this is something I struggle with. Considering how confident and assertive she always struck me as, I was shocked when she told me this is also something she's struggled with.

The advice she gave me is to just memorize and practice a few broad statements or reactions that you can pull out of your pocket so to speak when someone is being rude or disrespectful to you. It's not easy if you're someone who's been conditioned to freeze or fawn, but practice helps. Practice saying these things when you're alone. Put up a sticky note next to your bed or on your bathroom mirror with these phrases and practice them when you see them. Practice saying these with a partner or trusted friend, role-play scenarios where you might need to use these phrases.

Here's a few phrases that have worked for me. The nice thing about them is that they tend to shut down the situation rather than escalating, while still letting the aggressor know that you don't find their behavior acceptable.

"Are you okay?"

This works well in professional settings, because it's not like your work place's residential bully can run to HR about you asking if they're okay (but they might if you try to retaliate and give them a taste of their own medicine). However, it still effectively sends the message "I think there's something wrong with your behavior and don't accept it". It's also not likely the response they're expecting, so it'll likely throw them off and prevent further verbal aggression.

"Could you repeat that for me? I didn't catch what you said."

This one is most effective for people you believe to actually have a conscious and might regret what they said if they actually thought about it a little more. I find that often when I do this one, when people repeat the rude/snippy/patronizing/etc thing they either shamefully stumble over their words and show some remorse, or they change altogether what they say. In the off chance they don't regret what they said and end up repeating exactly what they said, this at least buys you some time to think of a better reaction since you're no longer caught off guard by a sudden rude and snippy remark.

"Can you explain what you mean by that?"

Similar logic to the last one. Often when people are being rude/snippy/patronizing/etc they're caught up in their own emotions in that moment and didn't think it through. This is a polite and civil way of putting their rude behavior in the spotlight and making them reconsider what they said. The other advantage to this one is that in case you did misread their intentions and they meant no harm by what they said or did, this gives them an opportunity to clarify that, instead of you just feeling bad over a statement or actions they actually had no ill intentions with.

If anyone has any further examples of reactions / responses / statements that have worked for them, I'd love to hear about them. I'm new to studying the art of how to civilly yet effectively shut down bad behavior from others, so I'm always open to hearing more suggestions.

[iwasbored777]

I've been reading posts about GUN and I know they're going to be so bad in the fourth movie. Because not only is it possible that Rockwell, you know the openly xenophobic agent, will be the leader, but we're also going to have the Metal Sonics. When GUN sees alien threats built from the image of the alien they hate the most and can't chase, it's going to be the perfect excuse to want to capture Sonic and also Tails and Knuckles for sure. Not only that, with Amy in the movie it's going to get worse! If she really can travel through time with her chaos energy, I have no doubt that GUN will want to capture her too so they don't get this insane trump card. I dare say that a Team Heroes X GUN conflict is kind of inevitable.

Thanks for this ask cuz I feel so honoured to shame GUN for everything they've done. That previous post about Shadow wasn't enough, they did so many terrible things and I can't believe I didn't write this before your ask.

I can barely list all the worst things they did but I'll try and I'll answer to your other stuff so I hope you're ready and I hope you don't mind this whole analysis 😅 but I really wanted to talk more about GUN and since you clearly hate/dislike them just as much as I do (and many feel the same way) I really want to complain about them to someone who'll listen:

They were the ones that sent Robotnik in the first place. At least at the beginning he was just doing his job.

They knew that Gerald was Ivo's grandfather and alive all these years but they chose to not tell Ivo and let him think that he has no family his entire life. They used him because he was a genius and wanted him to make all those inventions for them and when they thought that he died they just acted as if he never existed.

They hired one of their agents to seduce Sonic's aunt, propose to her, and plan the whole wedding so that they would capture Sonic (I'm sorry I'm trying to stay serious but what the hell is wrong with GUN?! I don't know if I should cry or laugh and this is only the beginning). Poor Rachel too! They didn't care about anyone whether it was humans or aliens. I kinda wasn't happy that Rachel couldn't stay mad, what they did to her was horrible.

They captured Sonic and Tails. Tails was injured when they captured him and they didn't do anything about it, they simply put him and Sonic in cages after they tased Sonic to make sure he's unconscious too, they arrested Tom too when he tried to defend his son. This scene always breaks me, poor babies 😢

They found Shadow when he landed on Earth, kidnapped him, held him in a cryo pod and were doing experiments on him. (Gee, I wonder why Tom and Maddie didn't trust GUN with Sonic and kept Sonic hidden in their house instead after the first movie).

They were responsible for the death of a child, Maria (Walters did try to protect her and Shadow but when others killed her he mistreated Shadow. He definitely had more sympathy for Maria, she was a human child after all.) This moment right here physically hurts me cuz not only that they don't seem to care about the child they just killed but also they're surrounding Shadow and Gerald with weapons as if Shadow and Gerald were the ones who did something terrible here... They didn't care about the child they just killed, they only wanted to capture Shadow, that was their priority and Maria was just a collateral damage.

Right after they killed Maria they threw Gerald, her grandfather who loved her, in jail for 50 years and forced him to make Eclipse Cannon, that can destroy the planet. He went crazy because of all that and WHO WOULDN'T?!

They froze Shadow for 50 years (would definitely stay frozen way longer if he didn't escape) because they just didn't know what to do with him and kept him awake and fully aware of what they were doing to him during the process. I'll once again remind y'all of Walters' comment that Shadow was "too valuable to destroy", because Shadow was property to them and not a young living being with feelings and trauma that they gave him. His face here breaks my heart... Look how helpless he was here...

I added as many examples of how terrible GUN is as I can remember but if there are more you can always add them in the comments. I could easily add every scene and every screenshot with GUN cuz even at their better moments, they're still really bad, but I tried to pick the most important parts.

As for Rockwell, yeah she's gonna be a handful. She's definitely worse than Walters. At least he realized in his last moments that you can trust some aliens, but she isn't going to be easy to convince. They'll probably be even worse from now on and they probably didn't learn their lesson after Shadow. They better not hurt my baby girl Amy or the Colorful Bunch. I have some theories but I'd rather wait and see what's next.

Amy was hiding her identity here from Metal Sonic but I'm not sure if she doesn't want GUN to find her either cuz she's not hiding from Sonic, she let him see her.

Either way, it's not going to be easy for our alien kids and GUN gave me no reason to trust them so far. It says a lot that Robotnik and Stone were WAY more likeable to me than GUN. I hope GUN will leave Shadow alone and if they can't, I hope he'll kick GUN's butts again.

[epickiya722]

Jumping off my other post, I will admit that the whole "Izuku forgot about the river" is something that seemingly came out of nowhere for me.

I never understood it.

I get that we haven't seen him talking about it, but how is it acknowledged that Izuku is an "unreliable narrator" and he doesn't talk about all of his feelings... but then when he doesn't mention the time at the river, he has forgotten about it?

He doesn't mention some things, but that doesn't translate to he forgotten anything.

It's like not mentioning your favorite color all the time and people assume you don't have one or you don't like that color anymore.

In fact, episode 7/chapter 9 alone proves Izuku doesn't forget anything, especially from their past. That episode has him narrate their childhood except for when we get to the river scene, but that was because to show Katsuki's POV on that day and why he started to resent Izuku.

It's not that Izuku forgot that day. It's just he saw it differently from how Katsuki did.

While Izuku saw he was helping out a friend, Katsuki saw it as someone thinking he was weak.

I don't know, I just never got the thing about forgetting the river when Izuku clearly is the last person to forget anything. Especially, when it comes to Katsuki.

It's just emphasized a lot with Katsuki because it was the day he begun really resenting Izuku and soon later regrets it.

It's definitely just a fanon thing. And just me, but some of the things the fandom does agree on when it comes to Izuku, I don't get.

[dellamortethelesser]

The Wigmaker Job

Notes and Thoughts - Part 1

This quickly grew out of hand so this is only covering the first scene lol. This is my attempt to organize my thoughts nearly line-by-line as I go through and analyze the relationship between Lucanis and Illario. These are my personal opinions and I'm open to discussion about any points I present here.

From the first time we are introduced to Illario from Lucanis's perspective, it is… almost derogatory? (dressed how an Antivan would think a Vint would dress). i thought you trusted him to handle this job at a party?

"it's a job" / "a party at a job" / "any excuse to primp" ← This back and forth feels natural between siblings (or those who have a sibling relationship) but with wider context feels… a little icky

Already, Illario is disparaging himself in relation to Lucanis ("Only 'the Great Lucanis Dellamorte' could refuse a summons from the First Talon") and even he says he's only here because Lucanis asked him to be. why bring him if you ostensibly don't trust him to handle the job? Lucanis's inner pov is different from how he speaks to and acts with Illario.

of course Illario is generally thick-skinned until it comes to Caterina. so are you. she's abused you both and treats Illario undoubtedly worse because he's not the favorite.

re: Caterina's abuse as listed. no food or water. beat them with her cane until their backs were scarred for 'letting their guard down' or 'fumbling footwork'. Lucanis says she "beat into him his commitment to his contracts" (re: veilguard banter where he didn't kill that 14 year old. lying? or proof of further favoritism?)

"For years, he'd hated her…" and then goes on to say that he'd learned that her cruelty was her way of ensuring their survival. Notably this isn't forgiveness but an acknowledgment of what she'd done and how it benefited them as assassins, which I would argue that it did. Child abuse is bad but I think she did prepare them both for the world they were being raised into as assassins.

"Beneath the bitterness in Illario's tone was something rotten." ← KEY LINE TO ME. Why point out how rotten it is unless he… already suspected Illario's resentment? Jealousy? He can identify the bitterness bc Caterina won't step aside, but also. ROTTEN.

"your time will come" / "will it?" ← Lucanis watching Illario watch him in the mirror. Really interesting moment because this is where Illario reminds him that Lucanis is the favorite. Lucanis goes on to say that he KNOWS this and has HEARD the rumors and still tries to assure Illario that his time would come.

"So, if she named you heir to House Dellamorte, you'd refuse?" ← really interesting thing to note here is that Illario is asking about being named as HEIR. Lucanis doesn't answer, they're interrupted, but "heir" doesn't hold the same weight as 'first talon".

they're not arguing who gets the role, they're arguing over who is even in line for it? so you mean to tell me that Caterina has been stringing them along like this… the whole time? Just name a fucking heir for fucks sake. the older one at least! if this was set up from childhood there would be way less room for jealousy and competition, or it would at least be clear WHO would be in line.. that being said I do believe she either did this on purpose. There's just no other excuse. Caterina what if you died the next day. they'd still have to fucking fight it out! (or maybe Lucanis would finally feel brave enough to absolve himself).

maybe that's it though? it's a test right? this whole fucking thing…. man.

"Illario's pretty-boy mask slipped as a coldness flooded his features." ← would have loved to see more of this in Veilguard. Regardless of whether you think Illario's writing is consistent between the books and the game, you're kidding yourself if you tell me he wasn't written operatically obvious in Veilguard. here there is more of a level of calculation and concealment? unless you want me to believe that his behavior was obvious to everyone except Lucanis… not discounting that reading of their relationship, just disagreeing with it personally.

Skipping ahead in to the fight scene, we see that Lucanis is living up to his name as the Mage-Killer as he pretty handily dispatches their assailant. Illario takes on more of the charmer role, tying up the mage—but then Lucanis immediately kills him. Why even let Illario do all of that work if you're just going to kill him?!

He even comments on it. "If I'd known you were just going to kill him, I wouldn't've put so much effort into the knots." ← Lucanis tells him after this to check his pockets and finds a note that does, admittedly, reveal the Venatori allegiance. That being said… you still could've killed him and got the same note. Unless it was just because he was a mage? But he was already dazed at that point. Why waste the time?! It's so maddening. This is the first of many instances where Lucanis sort of… bulldozes over Illario.

As Lucanis is removing the blade—"Careful, remember the tanner job? You ruined my best shirt." Kind of prissy behavior (Illario takes two steps back away from the blood), but when his cousin protests, Lucanis just… smirks and continues to extract the blade. If I'm reading this generously it could be simple sibling-esque banter, but Lucanis is not the sort to be readily endearing himself to Illario at any point.

Illario remarks that the Venatori's fanaticism re: nationalism and theology regarding the Black City isn't "worth it" (so he doesn't like the Venatori much either, mark that down?).

Lucanis says that it's because Illario isn't "a true believer—except when it comes to coin". My first thought is to think of Zara Renata's corpse conversation in Veilguard when she remarks that what Illario wanted, he wanted more than power, family, coin, etc etc.

So Lucanis's perception is that Illario is the sort of man who'd do anything for money (as the House of Crows is KNOWN TO DO, YOU KILL PEOPLE. FOR MONEY), and it matches up with his opinions previously established in regards to Illario's dress, motivations, mannerisms, etc. That Illario is… kind of a pretty-boy charmer who is only worried about coin and good clothes.

Hm. All bodes well on the Cain & Abel front.

RE: the true believer statement. Worth pointing out that the House of Crows was first established by Andrastian monks in the hills outside of Treviso; they assassinated a duke. Would love to have learned more as to whether there was more religious influences in the guild at any point.

Quotes are either paraphrased or taken directly from The Wigmaker Job, written by Courtney Woods.

[drownedinapond]

I've been seeing mutuals or people I follow get hate for liking Regulus, and in an effort to not hijack anyone's post, I'll barf my thoughts out here to get them out of my head. Stuff gets stuck circling around there for weeks if I don't. Will get a bit political cause I'm me.

I don't want to rehash the points other people have made because they put it very well. I will include a summary though, for anyone who hasn't seen this stuff on their dash:

Death eaters are the magical version of members of Nazi or fascist parties, obviously. Pure blood supremacists are Nazi and fascist supporters, even though they're not directly members of the party. Why wouldn't they be if they agree with their views? It's a big undertaking, people view politics as a waste of time on any side of the political spectrum, it's risky to attach your name to anything official etc.

Walburga and Orion are clearly pure blood supremacists in the canon and if you don't think so, please work on your reading comprehension.

Real people are immensely influenced by their environment, especially as children; characters are supposed to be representations of real people; Regulus' unique mix of nature + nurture made it so that he is too afraid to disobey what he has been taught until he reaches his limit, and didn't have any support to spur him in the right direction, unlike Sirius.

I want to add on to that by talking about headcanons and their impact.

Firstly, headcanons, specifically in the Marauders fandom, are mostly treated as canon since we have so little to work with, and many of us disrespect the canon on purpose because fuck jkr. There are a bunch of headcanons that the majority of us agree on, such as Dorcas being in Slytherin, Regulus' animagus being a black cat etc. People that like Regulus, don't agree with or are ignorant of Canon Regulus, the very little that there is of him at that! They either like Headcanon/Fanon Regulus who makes a sincere effort to right his wrongs OR they are fascinated by Canon Regulus as an interesting character, which doesn't mean they endorse his actions (can't believe that needs to be said). Same thing applies for Evan and Barty.

The Fanon version has the amazing ability to show what circumstances might lead to someone having violently bigoted beliefs, and in some cases, what it takes for them to shed those beliefs and take accountability for their actions. In my opinion, it's incredibly important to show that narrative, especially as written by people with no financial stake in what they convey, because of the times we're living in. The USA is a good example.

The circumstances that majority of the citizens in the United States were raised in implanted bigoted beliefs in them, some more subtle than others. Those circumstances persist and even get worse. That does not mean Americans deserve punishment, isolation, belittlement or ridiculisation. Those things make bigotry worse. They need new thought models and to be shown that unity and diversity make life better and safer for everyone. It takes people of the global south and marginalised groups in their own country to liberate the average citizens from themselves and then their government. Punishment for the sake of punishment doesn't resolve anything, though some people might interpret responsibility and necessary violence as punishment.

That being said, Regulus might not be compared to an average citizen, since he was so rich, but I think many people that grew up in bigoted environments can see themselves in him, even if they don't fit his story beat by beat. If you reduce Regulus to his worst parts, what does that imply about their hope that they can make a difference? If you wish Regulus' character and those similar would be collectively hated by everyone in the fandom, what does that say about them? Still, in a way, people that reduce Regulus to his worst parts add to the poetry: you can choose to do good in spite of the fact that you will always be viewed as evil, and that good still counts more than everyone else's opinions of you. (Hello Wei Wuxian)

I know people's hurt feelings aren't our focus in the cause of global liberation and I agree, victims should definitely come first, but hurt feelings lead to action. We could use all the manpower we can get, therefore it's better to make allies rather than enemies. And allies are made with understanding and patience. Not everyone has the strength of character to go against everything they've ever known on their own, as exemplified by Regulus.

So I do think that people bashing others for liking him are getting on a moral high horse and losing the bigger picture. If you categorise characters as good and bad, it's a sign that you have the tendency to do that with real people too, which is dehumanising. You can change though, like Regulus did 👍

*you can be part of a marginalized group and still hold bigoted beliefs, obviously...

**I'm not speaking out of my ass on real world comparisons, I've been reading books on political and social issues for years.

***I've been debating if I should tag you as a show of support, @messingwithmoony, for literal hours at this point, so I will choose to do it in hopes that it's a nice gesture, BUT if you are uncomfortable with it in any way, please dm me and I will remove this part! There are absolutely no hard feelings whatsoever!

[ruleroftheimps]

Things that genuinely bugs me about some fics with the Vees that I need to get off my chest. No hate, just a bit of incoherent venting.

As a preface, I'm not necessarily saying any fic that uses any of the following stuff is inherently bad, I've seen a LOT of good fics that use these, but it just drives me crazy when it's all I see and it's very surface level.

For starters, Velvette.

Almost ANY time I see a fic with an abusive staticmoth relationship dynamic (The ones that are playing off of the Voxtagram posts- I have something to say about them too honestly), it's always something along the lines of 'Oh, Valentino's so cruel to poor Voxy, and Velvette's his only true friend, ahhh, they're so close'. Istg this drives me insane. I don't know if it's just the type of fics I read or what, but what about Velvette do you all think shows she's a nice person?? (I mean, the same can be said for Vox, but we're focused on the doll rn) I've seen people say they think she's the most likely to be redeemed of the Vees, and why?? What makes you say that?!?

Literally- If you want to be nitpicky, the only Vee we've seen that hasn't mistreated his employees is in fact Vox, which, his woobifiecation has a part later. But why does everybody make Velvette the nice one!?! I don't know, just, if you want to make Val abusive to Vox, make Velvette the same?? It makes more logical sense too, since Valentino and Vox have known each other for years, and they're close, but Val's still a piece of shit. So why is Velvette nice!? She actually, in canon, treats Vox... worse than Valentino does!? So why is she always portrayed as the 'nice one' in abusive Staticmoth fics?

Also, anybody who says they think she's the brains/backbone of the Vees!? No??We see her do one (1) smart thing, which is identify Carmilla Carmine's reaction, but like. Do we really think the Vees, who were very open about being a team, didn't talk about it beforehand like they did with Pentious?? And she clearly can't be bothered to deal with Valentino, so why do you believe her when she says she's the backbone?!

And Valentino, omg. Like, yes, his character is objectively shitty. Yes, he's Not a Good Person.

But why do so many fans (I'm big on Radiostatic, so I'm mostly talking about those fics) make Val the Big Bad in other Vox ships?!? Like, toxic Staticmoth is amazing, yes. But, outside of the now retconned Voxtagram posts, Val is never too horribly bad to Vox. In fact, they're really close. So WHY is it this hard to find a Vox x literally anybody else (platonic or romantic) where Val isn't a piece of shit to him. (And no, I'm not saying every fic is like that, just that a significant portion is.)

Vox. I swear.

Honestly, I can understand the woobiefication for him more than I can understand Velvette's or Valentino's... just, people removing all his good traits. He's portrayed as pathetic the most, he's the one with the most focus, he's actually, from what we've seen, the most decent of the Vees beyond his comment to Pentious. (Velvette makes love potion and verbally abuses her employees, while also not caring about them at all, Valentino's... Val, Vox does manipulate the masses and all that, but like, not in a way that's extremely bad compared to his business partners? Really, his worst crime atm is being an enabler and being horrible to Pentious.)

But why. Why must he be portrayed as so overtly pathetic? Like, I get it to some extent, and it's hilarious in fandom, but when people start thinking that he's that pathetic in canon, it rubs me the wrong way. Yes, he's my favorite and I'm biased, but like. He's not that pathetic people.

Tl;dr, Velvette being protrayed as a super nice person (to Vox, in fics where Valentino is portrayed as abusive) and the most decent/smartest Vee, Valentino having all his good traits removed, and Vox being treated as overtly pathetic drives me crazy. It's still fun to read sometimes, but when people say they think it's canon, I actually can't believe it.

[charybdiss]

Drew all my kid's stuffed animals as lil guys totally normal mom behavior

[random-autie-fangirl]

I drew another Chara- living with the Dreemurrs edition

"The King and Queen treated the human child as their own. The underground was filled with hope."

I don't like this as much as the last one but oh well... I ended up rambling a huge amount in the tag, so if you want details and headcanons about the actual drawing again, you'll have to look pretty far down this time, sorry (Also, I ran out of tags after a while. Tumblr is tired of me, lol. I might reblog this more tags later if I remember what I was going to say.)

[fideidefenswhore]

the downfall and execution of a tudor queen (2023) / the boleyns: a scandalous family (2021) / the king's pearl: henry viii and his daughter mary (2017), melita thomas / anne boleyn (tv miniseries 2021) / the mirror and the light (2024) / elizabeth (1998)

[macchiatosdumptruck]

So hey how did we get to a place where "Nazis and rapists are bad actually" is an aggressive stance

[hannahwashington]

why do they keep releasing pictures of this guy 😭 whether he was actually the shooter or not all it's doing is humanising the guy. people were rallying behind a guy who was essentially a concept and force bc of how unidentifiable he was but now that there's a face there's a figurehead and THAT'S dangerous.

[actual-changeling]

.

[dootznbootz]

There's something so specifically infuriating when someone uses one of your experiences or your demographic in an argument, especially if said argument is about spreading hatred or is just so wrong. They "speak on behalf of the ___" to say such fucked shit.

"You're not thinking of the ___!"

"I literally am ___. You saying that adds nothing as you do not speak for me or for other ___. Shut up."

[unproduciblesmackdown]

ppl will be explaining how a difference is a difference & not a Deviation from a Superior state, & people who are the ones considered Default Normal (superior) will be like "okay....to be polite....i Might say i consider Some aspects of Some people's existence mere 'difference' & not being less than me...." as like hey i'm a Benevolent god. i still actually get to consider you worse & don't have to "humor" anything that challenges my superiority. if you only want everything to fit into the norm then it will all come back to upholding the norm. thinking of people's analysis of their own realities as equally legimate as being like Obscure, Irrelevant, Superficial & then using that reasoning to justify dismissing them. same as worrying that the [Different Lessers (Others(tm))] as Everywhere = a manifestation of the awareness that, yeah, respecting them as equals Does threaten your norm which is smothering everything everywhere. ppl who need to lock in the idea of Borders around personhood like um Yes they're all delineated separate Identities outside any hierarchy & so i think it's relevant to for some reason push back against "ohh so now Everyone's queer" like why not. why couldn't they be. what if they were. what if queerness was everywhere b/c it's ideological not a cordoned off Alternative Identity that is accommodated by focusing on Love(tm) as the new border around whose existence we might begrudgingly accept at arm's length (i.e. being otherwise "normal"! just imagine swapping out the binary gender (or, deep breath, presumed Private Parts) of one partner in an exclusive romantic lifelong nuclear family marriage, & that is Gay / Trans Rights. still gross but maybe we can do it, as long as they don't talk about it or shove it in our faces or even exist for more than one encounter w/us in our lives b/c what are the odds). evergreen laughing at someone suggesting ableist logic might be embedded in language of past & present b/c it's just So little to ask for that it's irrelevant but it's also So much to ask for that of course i'm not gonna do anything more than pass it along like "this is why i don't take ableism seriously" like yeah it's the disabled randos like it's the individual cringe teens(tm) ruining [the cishets would take Gender seriously otherwise!!!] & that's why you won't think about it or do anything about it & continue being comfortable with the norm & resent that actually their Difference is Less & disability is something worse that ppl "excuse" & all these ways that people are & all these things that they do are funny & weird & inexplicable & etc & one can't possibly be cruising along perpetuating a hierarchy with a sense that you're reasonable, well meaning, kind, etc etc & thus Justified, systemic oppression definitely wants to maximize how uncomfortable & arduous it feels to everyone rather than push to make it more streamlined & rewarding to embrace, or at least accept, whatever superiority over others you're afforded

[carbonateddelusion]

I have. Thoughts. I am going to explode with cartoonish sound effects that accompany my demise. play the juggalo step song at my funeral and make my old-ass relatives dance to it

[golvio]

#i'm sorry but you have to vote#there is no third option that will appear if you sit out#jill stein is a shill for putin she will not save you#and it's not just presidential#it's house and senate#remember how we literally can't get any shit done bc house keeps impeding?#yeah that's why#you need to vote up and down the ballot#legal shit takes time#you're not going to win right away#every single day makes me sick but it would be worse under trump#i repeat: i'm sorry but you have to vote#and if you have the gall to say 'well we deserve trump' shut the fuck up with your stupid martyr complex#your elderly neighbors deserve that? your friends deserve that? children deserve that?#fuck off. fuck all the way off#btw: not voting won't 'teach the dems a lesson' either. it'll only teach them to convert to republican#politicians want to win so they will follow what's winning#i'm sorry for being harsh but i will never forgive everyone responsible if trump gets back into power#i didn't the first time he was elected. i won't the second time.

I'm sure many people have already shared this here, but I think it's important that people here on Tumblr need to see this.

"I disagree with Kamala's position on the war in Gaza. How can I vote for her?" by US Senator Bernie Sanders