#there was way more than 10 questions

[bakuhatsufallinlove]

How do you feel about the fact that Katsuki’s apology and his death are not brought up again? I was really sad they never talked about it all. Do you have any headcanons for when/how/if they ever talk?

Dear anon, you've activated my trap card.

By which I mean you've asked me about something on which my feelings apparently vastly differ from those of most people.

To answer your question, I did not expect nor even want a scene addressing the apology again in-canon. Neither did I expect a scene where they discuss Katsuki's death, though I was less opposed to that.

But let me specify this right off the bat: there is a distinction between what I would enjoy seeing and what I think has narrative weight.

And I think that's fascinating to talk about. You asked me how I feel, so get ready!

When people say they wish Katsuki and Izuku had talked about his death, what are they wanting?

Do they want to see Izuku get vulnerable and choked up over Katsuki, shed tears for him? Do they want to see Katsuki see him like that, and watch him soften and let Izuku open up? Do they want to see him take Izuku's hand and comfort him, reassure him that they won, that it's over, that he's still here, and no one is gonna keep him from getting back up again? With the implication that getting back up again means standing at Izuku's side and helping him win?

I sure as fuck do!

But do I think that kind of scene does something for the story, themes, and development of them as characters that what we actually got doesn't do? Not necessarily.

See, stories are not driven by what the audience wants to see.

Stories are driven by what the characters need.

Not what they want, what they need. Often, characters are denied what they want because it does not align with what they need, and this is the very premise of their struggle. Katsuki is a great example of this, because at the start of the story, he wants to feel superior to Izuku, but what he needs is to accept his own admiration of him.

Fanworks exist to give the audience what they want, in a vacuum, totally separate from the linear structure of the narrative. You can just pop into a scene of Izuku crying and have Katsuki kiss him better and that gets us every time, doesn't it?

But in the manga, for a scene like this to exist, there has to be a need for it to address. So, what would that need be?

I think people ask for these scenes because they are under the mistaken impression that Katsuki doesn't understand how Izuku feels about him. And I cannot tell you how much I disagree with this.

If Katsuki didn't understand that Izuku cares deeply for him, then a scene like what I described would probably be intended to tell the audience that he needs to understand how Izuku feels and, up until now, he hasn't.

But that's not true.

Katsuki knows Izuku cares about him.

At the start of the manga, Katsuki is convinced Izuku looks down on him.

Chapter 10

We the audience understand this is projection. Katsuki's admiration of Izuku makes him feel inferior, so he rejects his own self-critical feelings and assigns them to Izuku. No matter how many times Izuku shouts that he thinks Katsuki is amazing, Katsuki's inferiority complex is unfazed.

He utterly ignores it, it doesn't even register for him.

Chapters 10 and 119

Instead he doubles-down on his own frustration and dissatisfaction with himself, engaging from a point of competition, as though Izuku had insulted him rather than complimented him.

This tells the audience that the problem does not lie with Izuku, but with Katsuki himself. Izuku cannot resolve this situation with words, we've seen him try. Instead, Katsuki needs to change his own perspective.

After Deku vs. Kacchan 2, Katsuki accepts—begrudgingly and with great discomfort—that Izuku does not look down on him.

Chapter 120

Even though Katsuki reconciles this, that doesn't change the fact that he is weak. He needs to grow as a person and as a hero. Now, his struggle is not just about his self-perception, but also his real progress.

Chapter 209

We joke about Kacchan being a tsundere, because he is, but part of the reason he rejects Izuku's appraisal of his progress is because he still hasn't met his own standards yet. Katsuki admires Izuku and All Might so much; he knows what they are capable of, he sees the gulf between where he is and where they are, and he is fighting like hell to close that gap.

He won't be satisfied until he does.

Chapters 362 and 409

I've seen people talk about this moment like it is a revelation for Katsuki about Izuku's feelings.

Chapter 359

And, first of all, lemme just say that no villain has ever said a damn thing to Kacchan that he didn't already know.

Chapter 358

ShigAFO's comment does not exist to confirm Izuku's feelings to Katsuki. It exists to signal to Katsuki (and the audience) that ShigAFO knows how Izuku feels, and he is prepared to use it against them.

This is a threat. This is about instilling horror in us and bringing to painful fruition Katsuki's fears about being a weakness people can exploit to hurt Izuku.

But let's not bury the lede: Katsuki would not have these fears if he didn't understand that Izuku cares about him.

Chapter 82

Look at his face and tell me he doesn't know with every fiber of his being that Izuku would die for him.

You could argue that because Katsuki understands Izuku's heroic nature better than anyone, perhaps he doesn't consider Izuku's protectiveness of him unique. Maybe he doesn't understand that Izuku loves him specifically and, to him, this is simply an expression of Izuku's selfless, save-to-win mentality.

But that I counter with two points:

Katsuki is not dumb, guys. He is our most emotionally intelligent and self-aware character. We are shown on numerous occasions that Katsuki can read between the lines and understand someone's feelings without being told (unlike Izuku, who's a damn nerd).

The story arc of Katsuki and Izuku's relationship is predicated on the fact that Katsuki rejected Izuku, but they are both unable and unwilling to truly disentangle themselves from each other. This means that their interactions, across the whole of the series, generally focus on Katsuki accepting Izuku and his own feelings, thereby restoring their relationship. To do this, he needed to both accept himself and better himself.

As a result of the second point, the focus is not on Izuku demonstrating his love for Katsuki as the bridge of change. The fact that Izuku loves Katsuki and wants him in his life is indeed highlighted frequently, but it is often treated as a given.

I've said it before: Izuku's feelings are not the ones that change the most, Katsuki's are.

Now you might say, "Maybe Katsuki doesn't need to hear Izuku's feelings, but Izuku might still need to say them!" And you're right, that is a possibility! Even if it is a given to the audience, there could be something that suggests Izuku saying these feelings out loud would be significant or change something between them.

But that's not what the series tells us.

Izuku does not hold back about the way he feels for Katsuki. Whether he is calling Kacchan a stupid jerk or saying he is amazing, Izuku is not subtle about what he thinks—in fact, these are often his most raw, unfiltered character moments, and they are significant.

Chapter 119

The only significant time Izuku does not tell Katsuki how he feels is his image of victory moment at the end of DvK2.

Chapter 120

My conclusion about this is that Izuku has felt conflicted about his own behavior and thinks Katsuki would reject him if he knew about it, so he chooses not to bring it up.

However, there is still a narrative purpose of showing us this thought, and that is to demonstrate that while Izuku may feel conflicted, ultimately he still accepts his own feelings. Regardless of whether Katsuki accepts him or not, the way Izuku feels won't change, and he's not sorry about it.

This moment exists for a lot of reasons, but chief among them is so that we the audience can see the true shape of Izuku's heart.

And what we see is that he loves and admires Katsuki, no matter how he acts or even what kind of person that makes Izuku.

I liken it to Katsuki's All Might card moment.

Chapter 362

Listen, I would have loved to see my explody boy get his autograph, but the greatest impact of this scene is not in the question of whether he will get one, that's just the tragedy lying on the surface as we witness his death.

No, the most meaningful part of this moment is in how it makes the audience truly understand that he still longs for it, even after all these years.

I wanted Izuku to tell Katsuki he is his image of victory, but the fact that it doesn't happen signals to me that Izuku ultimately didn't need to say those words out loud for that moment to matter. Izuku reconciled the discomfort he felt about admiring Katsuki and embraced his positive feelings for him, and that's pretty damn important.

I can and will indulge in fandom to meet my heart's desires, and that's excellent. But rather than simply feeling disappointed by canon material, I think it is more interesting to allow both what happens in the story and what doesn't inform my understanding of it.

I have been planning an in-depth post about the apology and what I think people are missing when they say Izuku "didn't respond" to Katsuki, but let me just lightly touch on my objections to that line of thinking.

Many people in the English-speaking audience appear to have a very narrow range of actions they consider a "response," and allowing someone else to act upon you for some reason does not seem to count.

If you frame interactions only by what Character A does to Character B and see Character A as the only active participant, you are missing out on a lot.

For example, Katsuki catches Izuku, and we see that as a demonstration of his love, as we should.

But how is Izuku allowing himself to be caught not an action that expresses his feelings? How is the fact that he responded to an apology with his own apology not indicative of how he wants to connect to Katsuki in this moment? How does it not convey what he feels for Katsuki, what he has always felt for him?

Furthermore, I see a lot of people take for granted how silence is a choice, and it carries meaning. Much like with what does and doesn't happen in a story, there is meaning in what people say and what they don't.

Japanese as a language values indirectness; it is not a bug, it is a feature. This is partly to avoid forcing yourself onto others and causing them discomfort, but another part is trusting others to understand who you are and how you feel without beating them over the head with it.

But you'll have to wait for my full post to hear the rest of that idea.

I dunno if this is what you were expecting out of your question, anon, but I hope you enjoyed the ride all the same!

[chikidyaff]

[genericpuff]

an epitaph

[charles-leclerc-official]

Thank you everyone for all of the support and the lovely reactions to my race analysis. It means so much <3

[whippetcrimes]

I have think there's something wrong with me.

I have one singular dog. Since I've gotten Misty, I've purchased 8 collars, 2 leashes, and 1 slip leash. In addition to these, I already had 3 leashes, Misty came home with a collar, and a puppy sized martingale slip leash.

Why am I about to buy yet another leash????

[batsplat]

past performance at the remaining five circuits for both bagnaia and martin

pretty obvious that jorge has had the edge at most of these tracks, with the caveat that this is a very limited sample size. last year pecco was in a position in the championship where it made sense to not risk too much (plus potential aftereffects of the catalunya injury), whereas this year he won't be able to afford that to the same extent. the positive for him is that he emerged from indonesia, a circuit where he has a clear pace deficit, in a marginally strengthened position - the less positive side is you wouldn't necessarily expect him to have an advantage over jorge at these other tracks

the sunday race in motegi last year has the asterisk that it was wet and red-flagged; for what it's worth (not much) practise wouldn't indicate pecco has a massive inherent pace deficit there - but you'd still give the advantage to jorge (cf pecco's horrendous 2022). phillip island last year was the one where jorge made The tyre choice but otherwise had a lot of pace in hand, that one feels like a bit of a toss up given neither has won there in the past (and also a plausible one for both finishing behind marc, maybe even a couple other riders). thailand last year was obviously a martin sweep, but that one did also feature the very tight three way battle in the race between those two and binder until the last lap (bagnaia only got p2 because of binder's track limit violation). again you'd lean martin. sepang feels like a toss up and one where you'd maybe expect bastianini to put in a repeat of last year's performance. valencia is the only one where you'd slightly lean pecco, if the title is still undecided then

overall, given the 21 point deficit and the circuit profiles to come, you'd have to say it's on martin's plate. there's a few more question marks like 'can pecco fix his start problem' and 'how competitive are the other riders' (especially at a track like phillip island) - at this stage a 9 point vs a 5 point swing is pretty substantial. plus ofc there's always stuff like 'hm the weather radar for motegi is looking a bit dubious for saturday'. then there's the obvious question of how both of them hold up mentally - especially given their respective positions in the standings. if the pace differential plays out as you'd expect, jorge can probably afford one more major fuck up and still come out on top, which gives him just about enough margin you'd have to reckon he can weather that storm. and if I were pramac, I'd take pains to ensure nobody tells him as much. pecco obviously can afford a grand total of zero major fuck ups, which traditionally does seem to have a positive impact on his performances. all of which probably means you'd expect them to converge again in the standings by end of the season, but with martin maintaining enough of a buffer to emerge on top. but who knows!

[broke-on-books]

☕

The live action Scooby-Doo movies?

I did not see this ask until RIGHT now (first time on desktop since crab day, second time since Nov 5 2020 [which was DOUBLY experience since I got my phone taken the same day]) so I'm going to assume this ask got eaten on mobile because tumblr, HOWEVER you poked a bear with this ask anon (as I'm sure you knew when asking) SO without further ado: my Scooby Doo live action opinions

So when you say 'live action Scooby-Doo movies' I'm assuming you're talking about the James Gunn films, starting with Scooby-Doo (2002) followed by Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed, just due to like, generally popularity and also the fact that I have actually seen those films. However shoot another ask if you wanted me to include Curse of the Lake Monster in this (because I will if anyone cares and turn this into a live-action scooby dissertation, i'd just need to like. watch the movie first) But anyways where I'm going with this is that this post is about the Gunn movies aka the ones with SMG, Freddie Prinze Jr., Linda Cardellini, and ofc our #1 man, Matthew Lilliard.

Okay so my take on these movies is... complicated. I wouldn't say it's as complicated as my feelings towards SDMI, because I watched the live actions way less as a kid and generally care less about them, but still no matter how much shit I throw at these two movies there are parts that I generally like (even love) that stops me from totally condemning them wholesale. Like the fact that these movies are FUNNY! There's so many moments from this duology that are just beyond iconic "like, that's one of my favorite names!" the whole thing with Scooby in the dress at the airport, ET. CETERA (like I can go on!)

The Gunn movies are genuinely SO fun and I can 100% see and understand how they've stood so well in the public view as a representation of Scooby. HOWEVER, this is where you start to see my problems with them. For the general American, (because that is the audience I'm familiar with) ESPECIALLY millennials and younger, who happen to make up the majority of both people on this site AND people I talk about Scooby with in real life, these movies, and the elements they introduced as "quintessential scooby tropes" are the base of their understanding of the Scooby franchise, along with likely some miscellaneous WAY episodes and maybe SDMI.

Which is where I get pissed off. In the pushing of the narrative of "breaking away" from the Scooby norm, Gunn basically invents (aka totally makes up) an idea of what classic era Scooby was like, cementing an idea of classic Scooby into the public mind that is totally disingenuous and just straight up false. For example, in attempting to portray Daphne as having taken strides to be seen more seriously in solving mysteries and defending herself, it pushes the narrative that in the classic era she WASN'T taken seriously, and only existed as a damsel-in-distress prop of a character, which is just not true??? Like yes, Daphne is clumsy, that's a part of her character, and her friends (because, fun fact, the gang ARE friends) joke about it sometimes because that's what friends DO. Framing that in some kind of sexist "that's all she does" lens is just total bull, especially as gang members fall into secret passageways/get lost etc. in WAY ALL THE DAMN TIME because that's how the plot functions! Like are we calling Velma ditzy for losing her glasses every other episode? Of course not, and Fred falls into passageways all the time, not to MENTION Shaggy and Scooby and all they get up to. Also one last thing on the topic of Daphne, like this idea of her mystery solving skills not being respected by the gang is just so supremely bullshit it amazes me sometimes, especially when she was the LEADER (or leader adjacent) through pretty much all of her appearances in the 1980s [Not that James Gunn could look at '80s era Scooby without spitting on it, but I digress]

AND THIS IS JUST DAPHNE! Like the perceptions pushed towards Fred (and Velma, but mostly Fred) through these movies are just as bad! Like okay, with Fred---In these movies Fred is just an asshole. I hate Gunn Movies!Fred. I mean yeah he can be funny but it's almost always so mean! Almost nothing makes me madder than a mean Fred by the way. If he's putting other gang members down (even halfway, like with his whole "dorky chicks like you turn me on too" line, which... ew) then to me something has gone very, very, VERY, wrong in your basic understanding of Frederick Herman Jones as a character. Like he's the cheerleader! He puts himself in between his friends and danger! He loves nets, and traps, and Elvis impressions, and wrestling, and the trapeze, and cars, and most of all he LOVES sharing the things he loves with his friends! (Sometimes to a bit of an extreme. No one wants to hear about your net facts, Fred) And the live action movies just don't understand that at all. And I know there's maybe something to say I suppose in that some of those aspects of his characterization hadn't been "established yet" by the time "Scooby-Doo" came out in 2002. But it's there if you look. For Fred Jones, being the leader means being the caretaker, (he's the Mom friend what can I say) and any version where he's cruel and arrogant and just DOESN'T CARE about his friends in the way he's shown to in the Gunn movies is just so far from Fred to me it's not even funny. And what makes it even worse for me is that this (or at least something similar) is the idea of Fred that has really spread to the popular culture. Just the "leader", the jock that makes the rules, the one that [insert X adaptation here] finally gave a personality and made interesting (something that has been said more times than I can count for pretty much every gang member, save Shaggy and Scooby).

And I haven't even touched on Velma, and how they gave her a bit of a early 2000s smart superiority girl complex against Daphne, plus the whole makeover thing and etc. etc. The Gunn Movies are pretty much what would happen if you took someone who hadn't seen Scooby since they were 7 years old (and honestly had a pretty negative outlook against it then) and tried to "fix" it, only his memory was so bad he just made up problems (and threw in a good helping of early 2000s style sexism with it) convincing pretty much the entirety of the popular culture that said problems exist and that Gunn was absolutely brilliant for fixing them (and then bringing up said "problems" whenever anyone wants to talk about Scooby) and this entire rant has been without even fucking MENTIONING what is probably the reason you, anonymous tumblr user sent this ask in the first place, to I, Swishy "Scrappy Doo Redemption Arc" Broke-on-books (dot tumblr dot com), which is his HIGHLY SUCESSFUL and utterly sadistic character assassination of my number one man, Scrappy Doo.

And I am going to try my damnedest here not to get totally into my highly passionate opinions over what James Gunn did to Scrappy in the first of his Scooby movies and how thoroughly it has pissed me the fuck off because I have been writing this post for over an hour now and if we start to really get into my feelings on this topic it will certainly be a couple of hours more but like. That Fucking Bitch. I give James Gunn personally a solid eighty-five percent of the blame for making my life as a Scrappy Doo fan UTTERLY unbearable with this stupid fucking movie alone, and just his Scrappy crimes would honestly be enough for me to say that I hate this movie, not even considering the numerous Scooby crimes I've been talking about here for the past million paragraphs, but the part about this movie that makes me the MOST mad the most pissed off is that it's actually a good fucking movie. James Gunn wrote two hilarious and entertaining movies that have become beloved in the popular culture for their successes in that arena, while at the same time pissing all over the core themes and messages of the franchise of which it was based, that of friendship.

TLDR; The Live Action Scooby Doo movies (written by James Gunn) are highly entertaining and fun pieces of media to watch, and are widely loved by the general public and looked at with fondness and nostalgia because of that. However, as a hardcore Scooby Doo fan (writing that phrase sounds so ridiculous but oh well) the existence of these movies and their impact on the popular culture can be extremely frustrating (despite any personal nostalgia said fan may have) due to their spreading of a misinformed picture of what "typical Scooby Doo" looks like. This picture is especially frustrating due to the fabrication or exaggeration of problems present in classic Scooby (such as sexism in regards to the girls), as well as giving more ammunition to other problems in Scooby fandom (such as oversexualization, and sexualization in general, which no one wants to see in regards to their children's cartoons, like HONESTLY.) Discussions of sexism and sexualization in Scooby (both of which ARE present and are issues, although not at their worst in WAY) can often lead to an overlooking of the issues that are very present and clear in WAY and have continued since then with far too little resistance (I'm 100% talking about the racism here) HOWEVER that topic deserves at least a dozen posts of its own that I am no way informed or qualified enough to even begin to think about writing. The Gunn Movies are frustrating to many longtime Scooby fans because of these reasons, but for me, and fellow Scrappy Doo fans there is also the added aspect of the demonization of Scrappy Doo in the live action movies and the affects that has had on the popular culture as well, making it uniquely inhospitable to like or enjoy the character of Scrappy. End post.

[bonesandpoemsandflowers]

david castañeda is my little pet underdog actor man because I’m rooting for him to succeed but each time I thirst post about him I end up fighting for my life in the group chat and getting read to filth because absolutely EVERYONE immediately tells me that there’s hotter latino dudes who are better actors with more charisma that I could stan. which might even be true! like, it’s probably true. but he’s my fantasy football team because the id wants what the id wants.

[daily-terus]

[pizzazz-party]

QUESTION inspector ishida is a little old man and it is very possible that the Tokugawa shogunate is less than ten years old present day. So we are only about ten years out of the constant warfare of the Sengoku period. What was Ishida doing during the Sengoku wars.

[leibi97]

.

[taraxacum-vulpes]

SCARY

[lecliss]

Why is ff8 trending???? There's nothing in the tag implying a reason and it's not super active rn either. Nearly had a heart attack for a second thinking a remake was announced or something.

[void-tiger]

Sometimes I feel like I keep having to prove my age. “No really, I really am 29. I really did start college 10 years ago (just…couldn’t finish). No I’m Not actually 15-21. YES really. It’s okay to talk to me. (But please don’t ask me what I’m doing instead of what I like to do…it’s a sore subject I can’t find a Small Talk TM response to. Especially with my age. Legit health shit has taken SOME of the embarrassment out of this…but that’s it’s own set of landmines. Can we please talk about you instead??)”

[muka-rapak]

Krabat das 4. bis 6. Jahr

I think I spent like. 20+ hours reading it .

7.5/10 raven feathers

[flippedorbit]

how’s everyones morning going