#they're not that shitty of people

[knifearo]

ultimately when it comes to shipping and fandom space treatment of aspec characters i just don't accept "aro/ace people can still date/have sex" as an answer from nonaspecs. like yeah. mhm. okay. now i think we both know that you're not saying that out of real interest in the diversity of aspec experiences. so you can turn in your seventeen-page essay on why and how you plan to examine this character's aspec identity within the context of a romantic or sexual relationship complete with evidence from canon and peer reviews from multiple aspec people within the next week or i'm putting you in the pit from the edgar allen poe story

[bixels]

This Twitter MLP human redesign drama is a mess, leave me the fuck out of it.

[maelancoli]

i'm kind of late to this but i just finished reading the scholomance trilogy by naomi novik and i feel like it is such an underrated urban fantasy?? taking the chosen one trope and turning it on its head with a fmc who has been prophesied to bring death and destruction, who is imbued with terrible power, but cannot even properly use said power to solve any of her obstacles because it would obliterate them and her soul. it takes a tired trope and the idea of an 'overpowered mary sue' and throws it back in your face by showing how all the power and destiny in the world is useless against a system filled with corruption that has burdened you with an easy way out (evil/destructive magic) that you can't take so now you have to work twice as hard as everyone else just to do simple, constructive spells instead of flicking your wrist and being done with it.

[scurvyboy]

Okay, seriously, why do you keep saying Ford hates women????

girl because he does

[cruelplatonic]

my personal headcanon is the vees were unremarkable nobodies when they were alive. i just love it as a thematic throughline for them. they love to let the public of hell speculate on them being famed and acclaimed since before death, but the the truth is they were a d-list failed influencer that got by on cheap controversey and scamming, a broke junkie who burned every shaky bridge he ever had, and a worn-out broadcast production assistant with more rejected auditions and tossed out script pitches than he could count. nobody missed them when they were gone, nobody cared who they were until they were dead.

[anthurak]

Okay so rewatching The Full Moon with the context of Apology Tour made me realize something VERY interesting about how Stolitz could actually be different from all the other relationships Blitzo has been in and burned down.

Consider what we hear from Verosika in Apology Tour: that she told Blitzo that she loved him, and this confession was what prompted Blitzo to completely nuke their relationship, to 'send a message in the shittiest way possible' as Versoika put it.

And you know that does actually line up with what we see in The Full Moon, ie; Stolas ALSO confessing his love for Blitzo. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if what we saw in that scene, specifically Stolas' confession and Blitzo's initial reaction to it, is how many if not most of Blitzo's breakups have played out. Certainly the really BAD ones: Blitzo's partner makes some admission or confession of genuine affection and love, only for Blitzo to believe they can't possibly be serious and proceeds to mock and belittle their feelings, just like we saw him do with Stolas.

But here's the thing: A lot of people have pointed out that Stolas handled Blitzo's response to his confession in kind of the worst way possible; immediately assuming that Blitzo really didn't care and shutting him out entirely without trying to clarify things to Blitzo or otherwise give him time to process.

So, what if Verosika and really most if not all of Blitzo's other ex's actually handled things better than Stolas? What if she/they actually DID try to explain their feelings and make it clear they really DO care?

Well, given what we've seen, it probably did NOT end well. As in, Blitzo's self-loathing and belief that no one could possibly love him are so DEEPLY ingrained and internalized that the more someone tries to convince him they really DO care has likely only caused him to double, triple, quadruple and QUINTUPLE down until he's trashing his partner's hotel room, stealing her care, maxing her credits cards and whatever else Blitzo has done to the DOZENS of people who tried to convince him that they cared.

Until Stolas.

Have you noticed the twist yet? :D

Stolas DIDN'T try to convince Blitzo he really did care. Instead, he took Blitzo's response as proof that Blitzo didn't care and proceeded to shut things down and walk away.

(Part of) What makes Stolas so different is that he unwittingly BEAT BLITZO TO THE PUNCH. He effectively nuked their relationship BEFORE Blitzo could.

And for Blitzo, this has NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.

HE'S always been the one to walk away first. HE'S always been the one to end things. Every relationship he's been in has ended on HIS terms.

Until now.

For the first time, Blitzo just happened to be with someone who is JUST as shitty at relationships as HE is XD

[sugarflow]

assorted ultrakill doodles based on things said by my friends

[knifearo]

"asexual discourse" is so funny cause dude that's not discourse and it's never been discourse. it's not an argument and it's not a conversation bitches are just yelling at us unprompted and then making up people to get mad at 😭

[notfeelingthyaster]

you don't need to minimize other people's favorite because you have a favorite: it's okay to love damian, you don't need to shit on tim's character/erase his trauma. you can love tim and not shit on jason's run as robin. you can have cass or duke as a favorite and not diminish the other kids relationship with bruce and each other. and on, and on, and on.

[eelclaw]

stupid fucking bastard. i am not coping with the leaks

[direquail]

One of the many things I find funny and irritating is the slant of a lot of interpretations of Alecto's name (that it's about feminine rage)--on this here wlw internet in the year of our lord 2024, it's easily made to figure as rage against God, or rage against patriarchy, or religious oppression, and therefore an allusion to the idea that she's going to get her vengeance on John for betraying and oppressing her somehow, but like

John is the one who named her Alecto. He's the one who named her that. So, naming her "Alecto" is alluding to the embodiment of John's rage--their rage, since they are joined inseparably (John even explicitly says that when he first perceives her: "You wouldn't stop screaming. You were so scared. You were so goddamn mad").

He says of Alecto to Harrow, "In a very real way, you are [Alecto's] children". At a very surface level, Alecto is (depending on the text or tradition), one of the Furies--famously, in several surviving Greek tragedies, who punish Orestes for the crime of killing his mother. In fact, in Aeschylus' Oresteia, they declare that they are specifically bound to avenge matricide.

So the name "Alecto" alludes to the nature of John's mission and how he sees it.

It also implies that his divine rage, the rage that gives him power, the power that makes him divine, that he either represents or wants to represent, is feminine rage. He was chosen by Earth (which, Furies are sometimes the daughters of Gaia); he is her champion, however he's managed to fuck that up. Once the truth of that comes out, it becomes clear that all of his power comes from her.

And that's why you get statements from Tamsyn Muir like:

“[T]he God of the Locked Tomb IS a man; he IS the Father and the Teacher; it’s an inherently masc role played by someone who has an uneasy relationship himself to playing a Biblical patriarch. John falls back on hierarchies and roles because they’re familiar even when he’s struggling not to. Even he identifies himself as the God who became man and the man who became God. But the divine in the Locked Tomb is essentially feminine on multiple axes – I think Nona will illuminate that a little bit more."

So yes, he plays the role of Emperor and God and Teacher, with all of the things that implies. And I don't think it should be discounted. But he also is (and partly sees himself as) the chosen champion of a goddess, or what is for all intents & purposes for a human like him a goddess. He is her avenger, and while she sleeps, her avatar.

And I don't think we're meant to read him purely as a parasite who's taking advantage of her to gain power for himself, either. Or an oppressive, Kronos-like figure. Especially if you consider Palamedes' theory of the Grand Lysis, even if he was purely motivated by desire for power before (which I really doubt), there are parts of each in the other, now. What was clear and separate before is uncertain and interpenetrated. Is his rage his own, or hers? Is his mission of revenge his, or hers? If he wants power, is that his own selfishness, or her desire to survive?

And does it matter?

[bumblingbabooshka]

Every time I watch the cold open of Memorial and B'Elanna tells Tom about how she ASSEMBLED a 50's television set from SCRATCH just to surprise him (there's no reason beyond that - just an incredibly sweet and thoughtful gesture) and replicated popcorn for him to eat while he watches and Tom says "They didn't have remote controls in the 50's ♥ Also where's my beer?" I contemplate murder ESPECIALLY because B'Elanna responds cheerfully to it - GIRL!!! LEAVE HIM!!!!!! IS HE SUPPOSED TO BE CHARMING IN THIS SCENE????

[iambeees]

Arcane: here's how cops can be corrupted, here's how war corrupts, here's a cop being corrupted, here's the corrupt prison system, here's a cop being corrupted, here's the corrupted government, here's a cop committing war crimes, here's more corruption, and some more corruption.

*some* of the fandom: can't believe arcane is so pro- police :((((

[soracities]

if we should protect children because they are vunerable, this means you would protect cruel children who bullies people who different than them then. the children who responsible to trauma for someone else's entire years

You're assuming that "protecting" children is the same as absolving them of responsibility and that's not what I said. All children are vulnerable, because all children are children; they don't come out of the womb with a perfectly working moral compass anymore than they come out of it waiting to hurt people--they're vulnerable because their understanding of the world is entirely at the mercy of what we, as adults, consistently tell them and show them. Children behaving cruelly aren't exempt from that--they learn that cruelty from somewhere, or someone. Your job, as the adult, is to make sure they understand that it's unacceptable so it will not happen again--but your job is also to ask why someone that young is behaving this way to begin with, so you can ensure they become better.

"Protecting" kids is not ignoring when they hurt or torment others, it's not refusing to teach them consequences or right from wrong, it's not "zero tolerance" policies in schools that treat a child being bullied and the child bullying them as equal instigators, and it's certainly not protecting them from recognizing, and atoning for, the pain they have caused someone else. You don't have to make peace with the now-adults who hurt you when you both were kids, but you cannot let the horrors of your own childhood impact how you treat or respond to the children living theirs around you right now, either.

You don't protect kids so they can get a free pass for bullying or tormenting another child. You protect them because kids are impulsive, emotionally reactive, and profoundly social (which means deeply impressionable) human beings who are still learning & processing insane amounts of information every day about what it means to be alive, to be alive as yourself, to be alive as yourself with other people. Protecting them is realising that you can't isolate the responsibility of a 10 year old from the bigger responsibility of the literal grown adults around them, adults who are in charge of teaching them about the world and how to behave in it. Whether you have children of your own in the future or not is completely irrelevant to this; we all become those adults eventually--no matter what happened to us as kids.

[jolliestlolli]

It has come to my attention that I might have... a type

[altschmerzes]

seen one too many snide posts about this in the last week or so but did you know that if you don't enjoy scenes in smut establishing consent or checking in then you simply don't have to read them and you don't have to go online and whine about how they're Consent Posturing and Purity Culture and Sanitizing Everything and God Just Kill Me Now. like you can have a preference without making it into a three act morality play, which is ironically what you are accusing other people of doing.

the same goes for like, detailed content warnings on fics. or content warnings at all. you can just skip those. they're not a sign of Purity Culture Gone Too Far or Those Damn Puriteens or whatever. you can dislike things without being an asshole about them or implying they're Taking Away What's Good And Correct About Fic Or Creativity.