#victimhood and violence

[edenaziraphale]

I've ignored most of the responses to this post because generally I don't care to argue with people online but the ideas that 1) Messages are not contained within the art itself 2) Treating Anders and Solas with narrative consistency would be to create a "nice cozy ending" 3) Anders' ending was like that to Teach Folks a Moral Lesson and make them Reflect are all fucking insane and I am losing my mind

There's a lot to be said about the weaknesses and strengths of the writing in Dragon Age games, but for me there's nothing that trumps the way the writers' implicit biases shine through in their treatment of various characters. Anders and Solas showcase the very worst of this. Functionally Anders and Solas could (and I would go so far as to say should) operate as foils to one another. Anders is a victim of decades of abuse at the hands of both individuals and a system that demonized him from a very young age. We are given information about his childhood and time spent in the circle that makes it explicitly clear that Circles are an unjust and abusive system that traumatized him so much that he fled multiple times regardless of the fact that he knew the abuse would escalate each time he escaped. In the end, he chooses to chance death and lifelong struggle via conscription because it is his only shot at escaping his current reality. After that, in DA2, it's made clear that Kirkwall's circle is even worse. Karl is made tranquil, the templars are mad with power, and it's heavily implied that the tranquil are utilized as sex slaves and that some templars may even be selecting mages for tranquility based on their desire for them alone. In the light of all of that, Anders makes a very desperate and destructive choice. Regardless of how players feel about his actions, it's not really up for debate that the context surrounding them creates mitigating circumstances and a sympathetic backing. He was attempting to affect positive change for a group of people facing fates that the game makes clear are worse than death. Despite this, the game's writing treats him as an unsympathetic villain whose actions are not only reprehensible, but completely beyond the realm of human understanding. That dynamic at the end of DA2 carries into DAI. Solas, on the other hand, is on a quest to undo his own actions. His initial construction of the Veil and the problems that it caused can be viewed with (some) similarity to Anders circumstances in that Solas was attempting to right a wrong done by someone else, but the key difference is that, unlike Anders, who was a powerless victim attempting to free other powerless victims, Solas was on a revenge quest to avenge the death of his friend and had an incredible amount of power within the system that he existed as a part of.

His actions had horrific consequences that birthed what is essentially an entirely new existence for everyone in Thedas eons before the start of any of the games. He finds the outcome of his own actions intolerable, and seeks to reverse them. He harms friends and allies to do so, and makes it explicitly clear that he does not care who he harms or what the consequences are to Thedas or the people who live there in his quest to bring back the version of the world that he liked better. Functionally, Solas makes an excellent villain. He stands out from Anders (who operates in his narrative as a symbol of the rage and disenfranchisement of the powerless) as a representation of power and ego unchecked and the damage that they can cause.

Unfortunately, the writing of the game treats him as though he is the tragically complex victim of forces outside of his control when he is in fact the over-powered puppeteer. He is very much the master of his own destiny and he intends to be the master of everyone else's destiny as well by ripping apart the fabric of reality. No character in the series better demonstrates the writer's biases than Varric, who, as a narrator for DA2, essentially acts as the moral arbiter telling players how they should and should not feel about events, explaining what is and is not moral. His reactions to Anders stand out in sharp relief against what we see of his reaction to Solas in the Veilguard releases so far.

To be clear, I don't hate Solas as a character. I think as a villain, he works very well. His complete and total disregard for the wellbeing of others paired with his affect of wise and gentle mage are compelling to witness. His motivations are understandable from the selfish and self-centered core of us as people. He's a fantastic reminder of what happens when we decide that we know what's best with no input from others, when we pursue our desires above all else beneath the veneer of wisdom. He's fun, well rounded, and interesting. He is not, however, a tragic and morally justified sadboi victim of circumstance, and I resent that the writers treated him as though he was.

[dykemind]

Violent males are never responsible for their behavior. Women are responsible for violent males' behavior whenever possible. Males hurting others, being obsessed with hurting others and gleefully becoming subhuman trash is not their fault... they're just lonely... underneath it all is a real, human person... a beating heart! a living soul that just needs love! If you only recognize their true inner goodness steven universe style they'll part with their cruel ways! Meanwhile a woman who returns her starbucks order or panics and fights back while being arrested is a dumb karen bitch who needs to be taught a lesson.

[tiefling-queer]

thinkin about a post i made several years ago about how the feminist movement collapsed into the mainstream commodified 'girlboss' 'feminism' and radical feminism when it should have transitioned into intersectional feminism because people will do ANYTHING to not have to listen to black women

[screamingfromuz]

you know, there is a case to be said that the "this is what decolonization looks like" mentality can be used to justify everything the Jewish community did since the 19th century to stabilize itself in the region and what the Israel has done since it's founding. and I mean everything, the good, the bad and the horrors.

It will even justify the Right wing nut jobs that want to expel all Palestinians from the region.

thinking of it, this is the exact same mentality.

[stillmadaboutpetra]

bensons a gay who can do math And Drive and is Funny and good looking but, of course, no relationship with his father. cant have em all.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Ava Green and Claire Hart

Published: Jun 27, 2024

The term narcissism may conjure up images of chest-pumping, arrogant, male self-promoters. The personality trait – with its hallmark features of overt grandiosity, assertiveness and superiority – is, in fact, more commonly observed in men.

That is because these central features align closely with traditional masculine traits. In fact, up to 75% of people diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder are men.

But in reality, narcissism is a modern epidemic that afflicts men and women alike. Our new research, published in Sex Roles, shows how narcissism manifests itself differently in women – but reveals that narcissistic women can be as dangerous and violent as their male counterparts.

Our research reveals that women with high traits of narcissism tend to be more vulnerable and insecure than their male peers. That means it can sometimes be missed by clinical professionals, for example, misdiagnosed as borderline personality disorder.

Narcissism is a complex personality trait. While full-blown narcissistic personality disorder isn’t too common, affecting about 1-2% of the population, we all have narcissism to varying degrees.

Narcissistic personality traits can be expressed in two forms: grandiose and vulnerable. People who exhibit more grandiose features are self-assured and socially dominant. People who exhibit more vulnerable features are introverted and have lower self-esteem. Both forms share an antagonistic core, demonstrated by high levels of entitlement and a willingness to exploit others.

In the context of intimate relationships, narcissism has similarly been associated with men’s perpetration of violence. Threats to their self-esteem can evoke feelings of shame, humiliation and wounded pride, leading to aggressive behaviour.

Although women are less likely to display stereotypical manifestations of narcissism, it does not mean that narcissism is not as common in women. For instance, consider the numerous reality TV stars who are notorious for their self-centredness and vanity – traits often associated with narcissism.

Yet narcissism in women extends beyond self-absorption. Vulnerable narcissism involves traits such as emotional vulnerability, low self-esteem and inhibition. These traits overlap with traditional notions of femininity. Such gender differences in narcissism may stem from gender-specific stereotypes of masculinity and femininity ingrained from childhood.

Consequently, the tendency for men to display more grandiose features and women to display more vulnerable traits may partly originate from parenting styles aimed at making boys more assertive and girls more nurturing.

However, there is a danger of interpreting women’s narcissism as less harmful due to their initial presentation as more soft-spoken, nurturing, passive and vulnerable than men. Beneath this persona, they may be devoid of empathy and harbour high levels of entitlement and a willingness to exploit others.

This suggests that men and women may be aggressive or violent in different ways. Narcissistic women may be more likely to manipulate people, spread rumours or be passive aggressive than narcissistic men, for example.

Our recent research tested this for the first time. In a study of 328 adults (176 women and 152 men), we examined the complex dynamics between childhood experiences, narcissism and the perpetration of intimate partner violence in men and women.

Participants completed an online survey and were asked questions about their personality traits. This captured both grandiose and vulnerable features of narcissism using the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Participants were also asked to indicate any conflicts that may have arisen during their past or present intimate relationships.

Men scored higher on grandiose narcissism while women scored higher on vulnerable narcissism. Despite these marked gender differences, it is important to remember that narcissism exists along a spectrum. Men can exhibit vulnerable features and women can exhibit grandiose features, too.

Grandiose narcissism in men was associated with greater perpetration of psychological partner violence such as being controlling, bullying or manipulative.

Somewhat surprisingly, grandiose narcissism in men was not associated with the perpetration of physical violence. That clashes with some previous research that measured narcissism using different methods. But overall, men are more likely than women to perpetrate violence, so a proportion of narcissistic men are likely to be violent.

More surprisingly, vulnerable narcissism in women was linked with greater perpetration of physical, sexual and psychological partner violence. It is important to note here that not every woman with vulnerable narcissistic traits is violent.

Instead, specific features of vulnerable narcissism such as devaluing others (assigning exaggerated negative qualities about them) and having entitlement rage (lashing out when you don’t get what you think you deserve) are associated with violent behaviour.

Women who exhibit these features to a higher extent are more likely to be shamefully dependent on others to provide admiration. As a result, they are more likely to respond violently in an attempt to regulate their self-esteem and gain positions of power.

For women, recalling having a caring mother during childhood was associated with reduced levels of vulnerable narcissism and subsequent perpetration of violence toward their partner. This suggests there may be buffers that can be acknowledged and integrated into intervention programmes.

Spotting narcissistic women

Despite longstanding evidence portraying narcissistic men as more violent than women, our research shows that narcissistic women are not only verbally aggressive, as commonly portrayed in studies, but also physically violent towards their partner.

Despite this, the manner in which narcissistic women abuse others may not be recognised as stereotypically narcissistic. Instead, they may use their feminine identity to leverage societal expectations of women as being nurturing and passive.

This might include exploiting their perceived victimhood to gain positions of power and control. Insidious tactics may include making threats of (false) allegations of abuse, withholding intimacy and affection, exploiting their motherhood to turn their children against their partner, and physically assaulting their partner and blaming it on self-defence to gain sympathy from legal authorities.

Our research challenges the stereotype that women are always the victims in abusive relationships. This balanced understanding promotes a more nuanced view of relational dynamics and gender roles in intimate relationships. By investigating features of narcissism in women, we can better recognise and unmask their true nature.

--

https://explore.bps.org.uk/content/bpsqmip/1/28/13

Perceptions of female narcissism in intimate partner violence: A thematic analysis

Abstract

This study sought to explicitly investigate manifestations of female narcissism and their attempts at self-regulation in the context of intimate partner violence (IPV). This novel phenomenon was explored through the lens of ex-partners’ perceptions of female narcissists. A qualitative approach using individual interviews was adopted to gain an in-depth insight of the subtleties and nuances of gender differences in narcissistic personality. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with ten male participants who reported having experienced an abusive relationship with a female narcissist. These interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Three overarching themes emerged from the data analysis: (i) dualistic personas of narcissism; (ii) the mask of femininity; and (iii) the hidden paradox of gender roles. Findings illustrated that perceived expressions of female narcissists depicted presentations of narcissistic vulnerability. Analysis also demonstrated that gender-related norms further shaped motives and self-regulatory strategies for females to obtain positions of power and control. These were established through adopting a ‘victim status’, playing the ‘mother card’ and using legal and societal benefits to their advantage. Female narcissists were perceived to employ strategic attempts at self-construction in sinister and abusive ways, governed by what society allows them to express. It is concluded that narcissism describes a phenomenon in females that moves beyond the overt grandiose stereotype. Limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed.

[ Full document. ]

[abla-soso]

What it means to be a colonial settler: A story in a few tweets

[because--palestine]

Mohammed el Kurd gives an insight into growing up in Occupied East Jerusalem

Mohammed speaks about when the Israeli state in 2021 tried to evict them from their home in Sheikh Jarrah, Occupied East Jerusalem. He sheds light on how Israeli settlers have used religion and the power of the state behind them to displace indigenous Palestinians.

He makes a striking analysis of what a perfect victimhood is and how dangerous it is.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by David Litman

CNN has a shaky relationship with polling data, as CAMERA has documented previously. In a previous, admittedly more egregious case, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour appears to have entirely fabricated the existence of polling data that fit her preferred narrative. On July 14, however, CNN’s Abeer Salman took a slightly different track by using existing polling data, but only some of it.

In an article titled “Palestinian leader calls on world to ‘protect us,’ and his people respond with bitter laughter,” Salman reports on the declining popularity of Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas. To her credit, this is a story that needs to be told.

But Salman, who has a history of slanted coverage (and even uncritically publishing an antisemitic cartoon), doesn’t end there. She portrays the story as one in which Palestinians are frustrated that Abbas is not “protecting” them from “increasing Israeli settler violence and frequent, deadly Israeli military incursions…”

In doing so, Salman shifts the story from one of growing Palestinian extremism and violence into one of Palestinian victimhood. The narrative portrays the situation as one in which Palestinians are mocking Abbas’ “calls for peaceful resistance” (a dubious claim itself) not because they are increasingly supportive of violence against Israelis, but because they are victims of Israeli violence.

But the data, including the polling data from Salman’s own source, works against her narrative.

The CNN reporter cites a Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) poll, pointing out that “71% were dissatisfied” with Abbas as president and “74% demanded that he resign.”

However, Salman leaves out the other side of the story from those PCPSR polls. As Abbas’ popularity has declined, two other indicators have taken notable and contemporaneous turns: (1) support for the two-state solution has declined; and (2) support for “armed confrontations and intifada” has risen.

Tracking all three questions since March 2015, we see the following trend:

Source: Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research

Shortly after satisfaction with Abbas began dramatically declining (from 37% in 2020 to 32% in 2021, 23% in 2022, and 19% in 2023), support for armed confrontations and intifada” began sharply increasing (from 43% in 2021 to 52% in 2022 and 58% in 2023). Equally important to note is that support for a two-state solution has simultaneously declined in a similarly dramatic fashion (from 40% in 2022 to 27% in 2023).

That is, the story isn’t just one of declining popularity for Abbas. It’s one of greater support for violence and for rejection of living peacefully, side by side with Israel.

While one must always be cautious of reading too much into polling data, as a recent CAMERA study showed, around the same time that polling data began showing these trends, the level of Palestinian violence dramatically surged, jumping from 1,248 attacks in 2020 to 2,063 in 2021 and 2,674 in 2022. And while UN data suggests violence by Israeli settlers has also increased, the data shows quite clearly that settler violence grew more slowly and remains at levels dramatically lower than Palestinian violence, with 358 incidents in 2020, 496 incidents in 2021, and 849 incidents in 2022.

This preempts the suggestion that the growth in support for violence among Palestinians was a response to growing Israeli violence, given that the data shows the surge in violence has been overwhelmingly driven by the Palestinian side.

One other polling point left out: what Palestinians prefer over “peaceful resistance.” While Salman states that many Palestinians mock calls for “peaceful resistance,” she leaves out what the polls show they prefer: “armed struggle.” While the polling question has not been consistently asked over the same period by PCPSR, the March 2023 poll showed Palestinians chose “armed struggle” (54%) over “popular resistance” (21%) as the “most effective” method to end the conflict and achieve statehood (only 18% chose “negotiations”).

This information exposes Salman’s narrative as rather superficial and misleading in its portrayal of the larger context. While she is correct in noting Abbas’ decline in popularity, a story which deserves far more attention than it has gotten in Western media, her misleading narrative leaves works to distort the other highly relevant trends shaping Palestinian societal views.

[a-wild-things-rambles]

hometown hypocrisy

and the bloods beating down in the city tonight and no-one will ever sympathize with our plight try to get up, but we just fall down trying to escape this damn hometown

and we got fires burning in our souls and the scars to prove it, what do you know but the rains putting us out drowning our sparks and our shouts

and the fogs setting in rain against my skin and the sky's beating me down wandering my hometown and the roads gotten twisted the old life's gone, i missed it guess it is true, you can never go home again

and the bloods beating down in the city tonight and no-one will ever sympathize with our plight try to get up, but we just fall down trying to escape this damn hometown

and blood seeping through our clothes violence begets violence, don't ya know but these fists are my hometown pride gritted teeth and bloodshot eyes

and the fogs setting in rain against my skin and the sky's beating me down wandering my hometown and the roads gotten twisted the old life's gone, i missed it guess it is true, you can never go home again

'and the bloods beating down' is the 2nd chorus/prechorus [look i changed the structure but im not editing my analysis i dont want it to get longer]

'and the fogs setting in' is the [main]chorus [planned to use a diffrent tone to musicaly distinguish it from teh verses and pre/2nd chorus][is in italics]

and 'we got fires' is teh 1st verse and 'blood seeping thru our clothes' is the second

NOTE: should be spoken or sung for optimal beat with contractions, but for readability has been mostly uncontracted. also idk how to spell what do you know contracted right.

the chorus is much later in the singers life than the pre chorus & the two verses, the hypocrisy is that the singer wants to both escape and go back to his hometown.

the younger singer always uses plural, to symbolize community, until 'these fists are my hometown pride' almost at the end. he refutes the cycle of violence by owning his violence as part of himself- his link to his hometown.

in addition, he has become the active perpetrator of violence, [previous references were 'we all fall down' [something else to him] and 'we got the scars to prove it' which is implied to be violence perpetrated unknowingly to each other because of 'fires burning in our souls'- when they get close, they hurt each other unintentionally] he now links his sense of self to violence, and thus when he loses his ability to do violence, he loses his self, and his link to his hometown, becoming the older singer

but by doing this he also will inevitably refute his hometown, by linking it intrinsically to violence, becoming the older singer who sings the chorus when he can no longer have that link to his self or his hometown because he can no longer do violence [his inability shown by him being 'beaten down' by the rain/oppressive atmosphere], i did want to expand on this, writing more verses to show the fall and how he ended up as the chorus person but it didnt work. heres the scrapped third verse

but soon those fists turned weak what do you know? you aint at your peak stress and violence aint good for your heart and you find that your bodys now falling apart

it can also be seen as by growing up to become a perpetrator and someone with power, he is now distant from his people and community, the solidarity is formed from their shared victimhood so when he steps out of that/rejects it, he loses the community [also becoming part of the violent cycle means getting rejected] [also the chorus says 'twisted road' we dont know what happened to make him fall, thats up to the readers interpretation] [transmasc journey of realizing your masculinity then becoming ostracised][or disability]

"guess its true, you can never go home again" is the only exception to the rhyming scheme, and it gives it emphasis, it was more noticeable before the chorus was squished together [previously each half line was its own line until 'guess its true'] fuck it it can take up space on yalls dashboards its getting split again

'bloodshot eyes' can be interpreted many different ways, from crying to injury to rage, each suggesting different meanings and affecting the text in diffrent ways

[pochapal]

of course rosa who is simultaneously straddles both sides of the abuser/abused dichotomy would be the one to voice this. if adult is a perpetrator and a child is a victim, what does that make someone like rosa?

[dykesynthezoid]

Every time I read anything Hulk related I end up having to lay down bc of the gender anxiety and trauma of it all

[pear1ridge-a]

I think its actually such a crucial part of cassie that shes. she's very stereotypically girlie and soft and not a fighter and she doesnt want to be!! she's soft and gentle and kind and thats who she wants to be!! she is put through a Lot of suffering but she won't let that change her!! and yes she has some. Conflicting feelings about the pageants and the unhealthy sides of intense girlhood but she loves it very much regardless!!! she loves to dress up and wear makeup and she loves pink and glitter and just!! she is soft and girly and she's just unapologetic about it

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

"Those who claim to be hurt by words must be led to expect nothing as compensation. Otherwise, once they learn they can get something by claiming to be hurt, they will go into the business of being offended." -- Jonathan Rauch (Kindly Inquisitors, 1993)

[wolf-cladsheep]

Truly a rollercoaster of words, my god

I’m so intrigued

i'm literally the priest's favorite sacrificial lamb because i am so docile and sweet and i hold very still when they put the rope around my neck and i trot along so happily while they lead me to the altar and they do not even have to tie me down because i lie so very still and only bleat once or twice in my lovely lamb voice and when the knife comes down it cuts through me like butter and i offer no resistance and i bleed so prettily all over my new white wool and my guts all unspool like the most beautiful shining yarn and my eyes are animal and dumb and hold no accusation and every time i die i come right back as another little lamb because the priest loves me so so much and he always chooses me for the sacrifice every time and he always places one hand on my small and twitching nose to calm me while he lifts the knife and he doesn't do it for the other lambs only me because i'm his favorite

[brumeraven]

🦋: Vigilance And Vengeance || mech pilots, angels, fury, stigmatization, transformations, violence, victimhood, probably worth reading The One Who Made Angels and Those Thankless Years first if you haven't

"At least you're not a Stig."

Bitter fucking comfort, though I supposed it true. At least I didn't proclaim what I was to the world in gilded writ. At least there was still something that was "me" inside of me, not just hollow Void. Would that that were all that was inside me...

See, I'd been a second gen pilot, snatched away from the claws of a mother who drank her fears away to stand wingblade to talon with the Beasts that threatened the world. And I'd been glad to go; even at that age, I knew it was what I wanted, knew it was where I belonged.

Not for the world's sake, mind you. Fuck the world, and all it had ever given me.

It was what I wanted for myself. I'd had nothing and been given a chance at everything I could ever want.

Strength. Power. The chance to win.

The S2's were incarnate miracles, striding tall through evacuated streets, absent the myriad flaws of the first generation. The first Seraphs, well, that man had slapped them together in record haste on a prayer and a collective dream of survival.

They'd been good enough, sure, but they were weak, vulnerable still, prone to cooking their pilots alive, assuming they held together long enough through the fire and Flame. We didn't know how strong the Beasts really were nor how to have a chance against them.

And the third generation, well...that was where the Stigs came from. By then, someone had figured out Halo field inversion, and it was all over for the pilots once they realized that the Seraphs cost far, far more than another unwanted child.

But the S2's...perfection. Could push 'em harder than yourself. They were fast. Deadly. And if you were good enough, hell, you were invulnerable. With the right pilot, man and machine would apotheose, an unwavering avatar of vengeance, the human will to never, ever submit again.

That's what they wanted, what they looked for in us. That pathological need to never, ever lose again, that will too indomitable to crack. And those of us who had had it, well, we piloted those angels as if we'd been born to those towering frames.

We were too in sync.

The best of us forgot how to feel comfortable in our own bodies, kicking and fighting to stay in those porcelain walls, desperation fueling our grasps at safety. Once you'd been one with a Seraph...everything else felt like death, or worse.

Helplessness.

Stumbling steps in a body with too few limbs, blind and frail as a newborn infant. I raised such a fit they all but let me sleep in the thing. It was for the best; anywhere else was too exposed. Couldn't be comfortable unless I was able to fight back.

On the rare occasion that I was forced out, I'd wander at night, looking to the sky, staring at Caelum glinting overhead, wondering if that man never condescended to us for the same reason.

I might not have been happy, but I was safe. Until the affinity became to strong.

It was the first inkling anyone had of Halo inversion. Its polar opposite, in fact: Conjunction.

One morning, He told me it was over. A hundred and seventeen fights without a scratch on me, a hundred and seventeen kills, and they were cutting me loose.

I was too old. Too hard to handle. Too stubborn.

So it was out on the open streets with a stipend and a "thanks."

I punched a hole through the wall when I heard the news. You could write it off as teenage angst, if not for it having been a solid meter of reinforced concrete.

They still let me go; too afraid to do otherwise, I assume. But it only got worse from there. The connection only got stronger. For whatever time I'd spent in the Seraph, its beating core lived on deep in my chest now.

I was stronger, yes, but we were one thing. A fighter.

The first person I killed just sneered in my direction. I didn't want to. But an S2 had only one job, pilot and Seraph alike. Never lose. Never stop fighting.

He burned on the spot, incinerated in the concordant perfection of my Halo. The thing in my chest demanded it.

At least he'd deserved it, not so different from a Beast.

The next didn't.

So I ran. I moved, over and over, city to town to city again, never staying still, never getting to actually live my life. I assume it all got swept under the rug, every broken body and burned building.

In time I learned to hide it, to force down the destroying angel inside. Days became weeks became months, and...I let myself hope. That there could be more to me than that. I made friends. Built a life. Fell in love. Read books and baked bread and did everything one was meant to.

Until the day he asked me to play stones.

I hadn't played before, but it was simple enough. White and black, good and evil, diametrically opposed, smooth porcelain maneuvering for territory.

I was good. The man I loved was better.

I moved the next day. I guess he didn't understand, in the end, didn't know me as well as he thought.

"It's just a game" were words no one would knowingly choose for their last.

I don't think the flames will ever die down. I know now that that Halo will burn anyone who wrongs me, anyone who tells me to stop fighting. Anyone who tells me I'm safe.

And they'll learn, in time, learn to stay away.

At least I'll never be a Stig.

~🦋