#when asking whether or not humans are inherently good or evil at a certain point the answer turns into a bell chart. '

[your--isgayrights]

The problem with dissection/the process of "understanding" in general is that going too far in abstracting something defeats the initial purpose of abstracting it and brings you back to the beginning which is the reality you were abstracting from and the thing is that the ☯️ is a visual translation of the fact that the furthest human thought can go without losing meaning in the process of "meaning making" is to draw dichotomy which is very similar to the fact of all or nothing data bridges that numerous sensory inputs have to trigger in a certain threshold of "difference" in order to trigger an action potential that conducts one sensation to another to create the physical pattern of a person making a "meaning" of something and while a computer trying to replicate that process would use 1s and zeroes because that was the most simplified/abstracted visual symbol of difference a person closer to our point in time could come up with, someone millenia ago observing the same process of the mind and meaning making abstracted it to the point of the dark 陰 and the light 陽 when the sun rises over the hill. Imagination is a physical process where patterns initially generated by simple chain reactions between sensory stimuli and behavioral responses that alter future sensory stimuli being reconnected and combined to create distinct, new patterns that then become a part of that concrete sensory data and perpetuate variation to a point where initial stimulus loses relevance. Everything created by humans can be understood by other humans because the functionality of our understanding has largely remained consistent over a long period of time, the variations in our attachments between symbols and internal stimuli occur at a much faster rate than variations in the physical makeup of our understanding process. The probability of that understanding, however, will be affected by variations at different levels of the process. Variety in stimulus/lived experiences/input data can cause difference in understanding, attachment of different external behavioral responses to distinct internal processes can cause difference in understanding and the pathway of understanding connecting similar input data of the senses to similar output data of actions can be variable while producing the same outwardly visible results. Given such disparate probabilities, isn't it really a miracle then when two human beings are able to understand one another?

[ashemellow]

noelashe and how humans are inherently good (bc i need to get this out of my system) (it's mostly just ashe) (long AS HELL! 1 note in 20 days!)

ahem

ashe was born in a healthy environment, with a loving and caring family he deeply loved. everything he did was for or because of them (eg he wanted to become a doctor, and the impetus for it was his sister being ill). they helped him cultivate the good inside him and were his motive to keep being good, so naturally when they were taken away from him, he lost that motivation. that's what m*tty meant when he said to ashe that now he wouldn't have any more reasons to be a doctor, just like him. unlike ashe, m*tty was raised in a troubled environment and never had as much support as ashe, so he didn't have enough chances nor reasons to cultivate his inherent good (obvs doesn't justify any creepy and evil shit he did, ew).

so with this new influence from The Bitch™ in ashe's environment, he started to change. he realized that people couldn't be trusted and became a shell of what he once was, abandoning his morals in spite of his desires. after all, you can't be good and happy at the same time- you need to choose one of the two, so now ashe continuely chooses to be evil.

however, it's not that simple. ashe does, in fact, commit horrible acts, he murders, lies, and jaywalks. he uses people to get what he wants, since he's learned that those evil acts can grant his wishes (in this case, literally), and though his morals would never let him consider any of those crimes correct, he represses them (and the guilt he feels for his own actions) to be able to keep going.

but ashe is not inherently or irredeemably evil, and he can still do good things for no other reason than genuine goodness. for example, he took care of noel when he got sick. he worried and cared so much to the point of cutting noel's food into fun shapes, and he didn't aim to earn anything with that (noel's trust, admiration etc).

when noel confronted him with this fact, stating that ashe could not be an irredeemable monster if he had been kind to him, ashe refuted it, saying that it's not because you do good things that you are a good person. that much is true, because you can do good things for your own satisfaction, not thinking about the people you're helping, only about yourself. but then noel asks ashe if all he had done for him was a lie, then, and ashe stays silent, because no, his kind acts came from the heart and didn't have with any second intention behind them.

but why? isn't ashe evil now? how could someone who was so wretched and broken by others, who knows very well how cruel humans can be and who makes an effort every single day to go down that same path because he chose his own happiness above being good, still be capable of kindness? didn't m*tty change him?

he did change him, of course- his actions did, opening ashe's eyes to the possibility of cruelty among humankind, something he had never experienced firsthand before. but ashe still has that spark of kindness inside of him- something he was born with and learned to cultivate over time. hadn't he been born with it, hadn't he been born good, would he ever be genuinely kind in his life? knowing it wouldn't get him anywhere- at least not far, because as he himself said, "kindness alone can't protect anything"?

of course ashe isn't a saint, but he's no monster either. no one is 100% good or evil- but what i think and what i'm trying to explain here is that goodness lies within us since the start, like an instinct, and evil is learned from exposition to a certain environment. of course those expositions can change how we behave, but it's different on each person- everyone, though, still has that inherent good inside of them, whether it's still being cultivated or never has been at all.

[yuri-for-businesswomen]

Ok, Ayn Rands in the comments.  A is A.  What an argument. I don’t see what’s there to be confused about my ask. I’m responding to the idea that you have perpetuated that anyone who engaged in these practices is inherently and undeniably evil.

Separately, the morality of rape as a practice, viewed universally, is far different than assessing an individual's moral worth, which is inherently contextual.

There mere fact that someone engages in a practice you deem immoral, does not make them inherently evil.  That's kind of the point of the show.

If society collectively accepts a problematic practice, it's far more difficult to individually fault a person for succumbing to that societal pressure and the associated negative consequences.

For instance, a farmer trying to make a living in a slave economy absent slaves, will be at an impossible competitive disadvantage.

He will not have the capital to run his farm.  It's unlikely he will be able to even subsist.  Whether someone lives or die, their entire quality of life, and their profession, could hinge on whether they owned slaves.

This is a similar argument to people who say “Rape is rape, regardless of legality, the morality of it was wrong then as it is wrong now.”

(1) First, "rape" quite literally isn't "rape" when comparing historical periods because there were completely different definitions of rape, which was my entire point.

Words change.

What we considered rape now, wasn't considered rape back then.

Even in the last 15 years, the definition of rape has dramatically changed both in common linguistics and legally.

IN the 1980s, rape was more narrowly defined as violent, forced penetrative sex.

We now live in a world where failure to affirmatively get verbal consent before engaging in non-violent, unforced sex, is considered rape.

These terms are constantly evolving.  Your definition of "rape"--and countless other words--will undoubtedly change over the remainder of human history.

Future generations will look at some of your beliefs as barbaric, no matter how morally certain you are of their worth now.  Including practices you may have taken part in. Does this make you evil?

Yes, undeniably slavery is bad. In the modern economic landscape, a lot of people will argue that the free market driven Capitalist system is just employing slavery with extra steps.

But, if you want to be rationally historical, slavery was an institution practiced by not only by one culture, but EVERYONE, commited on EVERYONE regardless of race/gender/nation etc. During the viking times, it is either you win over your enemies and take them as slaves (lest they go back and bring more people to take your people out, and of course as farm hands and more labor) OR get enslaved yourself and your loved ones. It was barely a choice, you were thrust into it by the conditions of warfare and survival. Some became "successful" and get this institution passed down to their children, who don't excatly know what to do with what they were born with except continue it as they are trained to.

No one should justify slavery, and yet it is easy to villify history seen through modern standards. I wouldn't know what exactly to do in such a scenario myself. The most righteous ways are either, try to be a harmless slave owner, or actively fight against the institution then you n your family get slaughtered by the king, or kill yourself from the get-go so you don't have to deal with society and it's problems at all!

Reducing people's inherent moral worth into binary "good" and "evil" is already an obnoxious and narcissistic practice on its own.

Reducing that moral worth on the sole grounds of whether they owned slaves--an accepted practice in many cultures in human history--is so god damn simplistic.

I am comfortable calling slavery a "bad" practice."  I am uncomfortable saying every single person who owned slaves throughout human history is inherently evil on that sole basis.

What a comfortable, naive, and privilege position you have, as you sit in judgment from your sofa, looking backwards 1000 years.

Back then, entire economies were built around slavery.  The choice of whether to own slaves, was a choice of whether to survive or to starve to death.

The world was a far more desperate and dangerous place.

When people refuse to hold any kind of nuanced judgements, you enter into a conversation where no matter what another says there will never be an understanding. A step above that is holding extreme viewpoints.

Is slavery bad? No shit. Are there shades of gray? Absolutely. Refusing to acknowledge that is forgoing nuance and acceptance of reality. Not everything is pure black and white. 

It's all just an extension of these posters' own moral narcissism (ironically).

The subtext here is that they all view themselves as amazing people.  The logical implication of their argument is that 99.9999999999999999% of all humans living before them were shittier people than they are.

How convenient a world view that everyone who lived before "you" is inferior to you, simply by virtue of their participation in antiquated (but accepted-at-the-time) societal practices, while you sit in judgment from your couch.

These naive, narcissistic fools, all pretend they would be "better" people if they were magically born into those same historical eras.

the world is not drawn in absolute moral binaries.  Yet, the vast majority of you draw people in absolute moral binaries, e.g., "everyone who supported or practiced “rape” or slavery is inherently evil."

No one is saying that Slavery is good.  It's bad.  I'm not excusing slavery.

I'm simply suggesting that historical circumstance--just like mens rea--has a role in assessing morality.

People are products of their time and place.  I have a hard time calling someone "evil" merely because they engaged in some antiquated practice, which was difficult NOT to engage in (or else suffer terrible consequences).

It's also a spectrum.  Someone might own slaves, but not beat their slaves.  And slavery varied by country and time. I feel like people are automatically treating all historical slavery as if it is American slavery.

Slaves in Roman times could be extremely educated and live fairly comfortable lives, in the case of Greek slaves.  Romans would often use Greek slaves for administrative purposes rather than manual labor (e.g., Greek Slaves would read and write letters for their masters whose vision was failing).

That kind of slavery is far less brutal than, e.g., American slavery, where you are keeping people in cages, and working them to death.

When the only realistic option in a feudal society is being a slave-owning noble or merchant, or a impoverished serf who dies at age 30 from starvation, I'm far more sympathetic to people engaging in a bad practice.

hey did you know you can make your own blog

[the-nysh]

Soooo....Saitama had already begun to put 2&2 together about who actually 'took care' of the cadres before with King's 'Ultimate Move,' saw Garou tanking hits vs more monsters to step in and help defeat Evil Ocean Water with a Serious Punch, and then saw much of the direct evidence himself when Garou made a huge scene chopping the centipede...

Enough for Saitama to take initiative with enough personal interest in him to confront an idle Garou himself with the million dollar identity QUESTION:

Whether Saitama's suddenly arrived to sate his own curiosity is one thing (surprisingly leaving the other heroes to deal with the wave's aftermath on their own, might I add.) For example, to ask about Garou's mystery identity/'costume' and his unknown apparent strength, or perhaps Saitama just wants more general information to get to the bottom of what's going on. (Hopefully Saitama doesn't blame Garou for the whole Monster Association mess here however, as that would be....a little unfair.) But so far, Saitama has seen no other incriminating evidence towards Garou being bad here yet (unless he remembers the 'Hero Hunter' stuff and the dine & dash encounter Garou looks different enough that even wc Saitama didn't recognize him)...that heck, Saitama could just be frank and forthright praising Garou's strength/heroics for helping to take out the monsters. :P (Which would be interesting to see how Garou reacts to such unexpected honesty, heh.)

As long as Saitama's question isn't ignored, brushed off, or interrupted by something else happening, like the other heroes or Psykos showing up for example, then...depending on who/what actually instigates the strength-gauging friendly spar fight (if it's starting now or later after a good introductory talk) I hope to see certain callbacks come up in their confrontation.

1. For Saitama to discern, just like Bang did in Garou's dojo flashback, the inherent 'softness' and hesitancy in Garou's fists to commit to the monster act.

Because while Garou may have destroyed the baddest monsters in spectacular (violent) fashion, he still keeps a non-lethal level of restraint when he faces hero (human) opponents. He never crosses the line of actually killing people (even in his feral 'sleep,' he doesn't want to) like he does monsters, so this distinction in his fighting intent/hesitancy, depending on who he targets, becomes an examination of his convictions & seriousness when it comes to his choice to hurt (vs his truer feelings/instincts to save) people as a 'monster,' that I hope Saitama still notices this nature about his behavior as they exchange fists and calls him out for being particularly un-monster-like 'sweet/soft' towards him.

2. While Saitama figuring out what's up with Garou is a main point of interest, on Saitama's side of character importance, I also hope his heroism is called into question and critiqued by Garou as well, as a reexamination of THIS moment:

Primarily for the "you're strong, but so what?" dilemma most familiar and personal to Saitama, as Garou (similar to King here) questions his duty/ideals and the reason why Saitama is even a hero in the first place. Because Saitama may be the strongest insurmountable 'final boss' wall towards Garou, but as the greatest hero??? (Has Saitama even found the answer or thought about it any further beyond seeing heroism as just a hobby?) When after the tournament arc - originally he was interested in martial arts because of hearing about Garou!! how fatefully ironic now - Saitama felt the stagnation like he gained nothing special from the experience and thought he was losing sight of why he originally became a hero. So King's question, weighing Saitama's heroic ideals of helping others vs his self-interest/satisfaction (seeking to sate his boredom/loneliness while 'too strong'), is just as relevant now and aligns with what I hope Garou's confrontation makes Saitama think about and reconsider from another perspective again.

Because, to put things in blunt perspective, when manga Garou hasn't really done anything wrong here yet, if Saitama hypothetically instigates the fight for self-serving reasons (which Garou would notice as not very heroic) for example - fighting to satisfy his own level of boredom/curiosity with someone 'strong,' unjustly blaming Garou for the 'noise' and destroying Saitama's house that wasn't Garou's fault, or the escalating monster disaster he didn't cause Garou actually helped destroy the worst monster threats!, taunting Garou to fight 'better' by insulting him & calling him 'chicken', or if the fight is framed with Saitama as the aggressor - aka the schoolyard 'bully' beating on Garou for the 'fun' of a good fight (which IS a panel present in the webcomic!) then...any of that portrayed in the manga's context would actually look poorly on Saitama's character. :O (!!!!) If Saitama were to behave just like his webcomic counterpart would towards manga Garou right now, it would honestly look quite unpleasant;;; as someone who likes both characters - because it's never fun to see one uplifted or degraded/humiliated at the expense of another. Which goes both ways - their characters can be challenged as they reexamine their strongest values/ideals, but I'd rather not see either character 'look bad' to achieve the arc's goal either.

So, provided the manga does its own thing that's consistent & respectable to both characters, as much as their fight originally leaned towards Garou's cathartic self-discovery and realizations before, I can only hope it brings something somewhat equally significant and enlightening towards Saitama's character as well. (As a possible continuation of what Saitama thought about and felt he didn't gain anything from last time following the manga's tournament arc.) A balance like that from ONE, appropriate to the manga's new context concerning and justifying why they'd fight, would be ideal to me.

[phantomnostalgist]

An Interview on Phantom, with Susan Kay

Back in 1993 I wrote a fan letter to Susan Kay, and asked if she'd be willing to give me an interview for the Phantom Appreciation Society fanzine. So this is the interview she gave me, by letter, published in "Masquerade" issue 4, Spring 1994. (Masquerade and Beneath the Mask were the same zine, it just changed name on issue 5 as I discovered there was already a musicals zine called Masquerade.)

AN INTERVIEW WITH SUSAN KAY

When and how did you first become interested in the story or the Phantom?

My first contact with the Phantom was a chance purchase of the soundtrack of the Lloyd Webber musical. The music took me to the London production and the show took me to the original Gaston Leroux novel, which I hoped would satisfy the immense appetite I had developed for further knowledge of the character. My reaction to the book was a mixture of disappointment and fascination. It told me so much less than I had hoped for, and yet the little there was intrigued me even further: the odd paragraph here, the throwaway line there which mentioned the Phantom's earlier life. Increasingly the last two pages of Leroux's book began to read to me like the plot of another story, a story which refused to go away and clamoured ever more incessantly to be written.

Do you think that Leroux's novel was based on a true story?

It's very tempting to think so.

How many times have you seen the Lloyd Webber show?

I've seen it ten times in all. Six times in London, twice in Los Angeles, and twice in Hamburg where I was the guest of the German Phantom, Thomas Schulze.

Do you still see it?

The last time I saw the musical in England was in London in April 1991. The following day "Phantom" was announced Romantic Novel of the Year at the RNA awards luncheon, so perhaps that particular show was a good omen for me.

Who is your favourite Phantom?

Michael Crawford was wonderful, and I found Dave Willetts very powerful. Anyone who has the opportunity should try to see Thomas Schulze in the Hamburg production.

How did you create the character of Erik in your book?

When I came to examine the character myself I came to the conclusion that the real tragedy of his life was not his disfigurement. but his complete inability to accept that his mother had ever loved him. This fatal belief warped his whole existence and rendered him incapable of recognizing love even when it was staring him in the face, whether it was the first infatuation of a young girl, the dark desire of an older woman, the affection of a friend, or the real admiration of those who came to work with or serve him in one capacity or another. This idea became central to the whole storyline, leading inexorably to one tragedy after another. Certainly his life was shaped by the rejection of society, horrific experience and some cruel twists of fate, but ultimately this was always a character relentlessly set on a course of self-destruction. I also felt that, in spite of the terrible crimes he commits during the course of his life, the Phantom was neither a psychopath nor an inherently evil man. In order to make that last act of self-sacrifice for the sake of love there must always have been an essential core of good within the character. Leroux himself allowed his Phantom certain traits of kindness, humour and civilized behaviour. I felt that essentially this was a fiercely proud man who came to desire his own human dignity to an almost insane degree and would go to any lengths to protect it. Couple this with the unstable temperament that often accompanies pure genius and you have a very dangerous man, a man capable of killing for a real or imagined slight even the people he most desperately loves. Those attracted to him are always rightly aware of an underlying fear, and I believe it is this mixture of attraction and fear which is responsible for his powerful sexuality. It's what separates the Phantom from Raoul and all the other nice young boys like him who offer a safe mundane existence to a woman, but no thrills or chills.

What was the most difficult part of the book to write?

The first two sections dealing with his childhood were the most straight-forward. The sections from Rome through to the building of the Opera House were very demanding from the point of research, some of which was obscure and hard to obtain. But the section I found most hard to actually write was the part of the story which directly overlaps Leroux's. It's very difficult to trespass nonchalantly over someone else's story, particularly when it has been adapted so many times in different mediums. I had to dispense with a lot of inhibitions, the chief of which was ""How can I ever dare to meddle with this?"

What would you have done if you were Christine?

I think I would have had to do what she did in the book, and go back that one last time to make things right. It would have been a terrible thing to live with otherwise: it would have destroyed both her and Raoul in the end.

See also: the original UK paperback cover art for Kay’s Phantom, and some nice tarot-style art from a magazine at the time.

[killianmesmalls]

On your comments about Jack: ye-es, in the sense that Jack is a character who definitely deserved better than he was treated by the characters. The way Dean especially treats him reflects very badly on Dean, no question. But, speaking as a viewer, I think the perspective needs to shift a little bit.

To me, Jack is Dawn from Buffy, or Scrappy Doo. He’s an (in my opinion) irritating kid who is introduced out of nowhere to be both super vulnerable and super OP, and the jeopardy is centered around him in a way that has nothing to do with his actual character or relationships. He’s mostly around to be cute and to solve or create problems — he never has any firm character arcs or goals of his own, nor any deeper purpose in the meta narrative. In this way, he’s a miss for SPN, which focuses heavily on conflicts as metaphors for real life.

Mary fits so much better in that framework, and introducing her as a developed, flawed person works really well with the narrative. It is easy for us to care about Mary, both as the dead perfect mother on the pedestal and as the flawed, human woman who could not live up to her sons’ expectations. That connection is built into the core of SPN, and was developed over years, even before she was a character. When she was added, she was given depth and nuance organically, and treated as a flawed, complex character rather than as a plot device or a contrivance. She was given a voice and independence, and became a powerful metaphor for developing new understandings of our parents in adulthood, as well as an interesting and well-rounded character. You care that she’s dead, not just because Sam and Dean are sad, but for the loss of her development and the potential she offered. So, in that sense, I think a lot of people were frustrated that she died essentially fridged for a second time, and especially in service of the arc of a weaker character.

And like, you’re right, no one can figure out if Jack is a toddler or a teenager. He’s both and he’s neither, because he’s never anything consistently and his character arc is always “whatever the plot needs it to be.” Every episode is different. Is he Dean’s sunny opportunity to be a parent and make up for his dad’s shitty parenting? Yes! Is he also Dean’s worst failure and a reminder that he has done many horrible things, including to “innocent” children? Yes! Is he Cas’s child? Yes! Is he Dean’s child? Yes! But also, no! Is he Sam’s child? Yes! Is he a lonely teenager who does terrible things? Yes! Is he a totally innocent little lamb who doesn’t get why what he is doing is wrong? Yes! Is he the most powerful being in the universe? Yes! Does he need everyone to take care of him? Yes! Is he just along for the ride? Yes! Is he responsible for his actions? Kinda??? Sometimes??? What is he???

Mary as a character is narratively cohesive and fleshed-out. Jack is a mishmash of confusing whatever’s that all add up to a frustrating plot device with no consistent traits to latch on to. Everything that fans like about him (cute outfits, gender play, well-developed parental bonds with the characters) is fanon. So, yes, the narrative prioritizes Mary. Many fans prioritize Mary, at least enough that Dean’s most heinous acts barely register. To the narrative (not to Cas, which is a totally different situation), Jack is only barely more of a character than Emma Winchester, who Sam killed without uproar seasons earlier. He’s been around longer, but he’s equally not really real.

I debated on responding to this because, to tell the truth, I think we fundamentally disagree on a number of subjects and, as they say, true insanity is arguing with anyone on the internet. However, you spent a lot of time on the above and I feel it's only fair to say my thoughts, even if I don't believe it will sway you any more than what you said changed my opinions.

I'm assuming this was in response to this post regarding how Jack's accidental killing of Mary was treated so severely by the brothers, particularly Dean, because it was Mary and, had it been a random character like the security guard in 13x06, it would have been treated far differently. However, then the argument becomes less about the reaction of the Winchester brothers to this incident and more the value of Jack or Mary to the audience.

I believe we need to first admit that both characters are inherently archetypes—Mary as the Madonna character initially then, later, as a metaphor for how imperfect and truly human our parents are compared to the idol we have as children, and Jack as the overpowered child who is a Jesus allegory by the end. Both have a function within the story to serve the Winchester brothers, through whose lens and with whose biases we are meant to view the show's events. We also need to admit that the writers didn't think more than a season ahead for either character, especially since it wasn't initially supposed to be Mary that came back at the end of season 11 but John, and they only wrote enough for Jack in season 13 to gauge whether or not the audience would want him to continue on or if he needed to be killed off by the end of the season. Now, I know we curate our own experiences online which leads to us being in our own fandom echo chambers, however it is important to note that the character was immediately successful enough with the general audience that, after his first episode or two, he was basically guaranteed a longer future on the show.

I have to admit, I’m not entirely sure why the perspective of how his character is processed by some audience members versus others has any bearing on the argument that he deserved to be treated better overall by the other characters especially when taking their own previous actions in mind. I’m not going to tell you that your opinion is wrong regarding your feelings for Jack. It’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it, it harms no one to have it and express it. My feelings on Jack are clearly very different from your own, but this is really just two different people who processed a fictional person in different ways. I personally believe he has a purpose in the Winchesters’ story, including Castiel��s, as he reflects certain aspects of all of them, gives them a way to explore their own histories through a different perspective, and changes the overall dynamic of Team Free Will from “soldiers in arms” to a family (Misha’s words). In the beginning he allows Sam to work through his past as the “freak” and powerful, dangerous boy wonder destined to bring hell on earth. With Dean, his presence lets Dean work through his issues with John and asks whether he will let history repeat itself or if he’ll work to break the cycle. Regarding Cas, in my opinion he helps the angel reach his “final form” of a father, member of a family, lover and protector of humanity, rebellious son, and the true show of free will. 

From strictly the story, he has several arcs that work within themes explored in Supernatural, such as the argument of nature versus nurture, the question of what we’re willing to give up in order to protect something or someone else and how ends justify the means, and the struggle between feeling helpless and powerless versus the corruptive nature of having too much power and the dangerous lack of a moral compass. His goals are mentioned and on display throughout his stint on the show, ones that are truly relatable to some viewers: the strong desire to belong—the need for family and what you’ll do to find and keep it. 

With Mary, we first need to establish whether the two versions of her were a writing flaw due to the constant change in who was dictating her story and her relationship to the boys, which goes against the idea that her characterization was cohesive and fleshed-out but, rather, put together when needed for convenience, or if they both exist because, as stated above, we are seeing the show primarily through the biased lens of the Winchester brothers and come to face facts about the true Mary as they do. Like I said in my previous post, I don’t dislike Mary and I don’t blame her for her death (either one). However, I do have a hard time seeing her as a more nuanced, fleshed-out character than Jack. True, a lot of her problems are more adult in nature considering she has to struggle with losing her sons’ formative years and meeting them as whole adults she knows almost nothing about, all because of a choice she made before they were born. 

However, her personal struggles being more “mature” in nature (as they center primarily on parental battles) doesn’t necessarily mean her story has layers and Jack’s does not. They are entirely different but sometimes interconnected in a way that adds to both of their arcs, like Mary taking Jack on as an adoptive son which gives her the moments of parenting she lost with Sam and Dean, and Jack having Mary as a parental figure who understands and supports him gives him that sense of belonging he had just been struggling with to the point of running away while he is also given the chance to show “even monsters can do good”. 

I’d also argue that Jack being many ages at once isn’t poor writing so much as a metaphor for how, even if you’re forced to grow up fast, that doesn’t mean you’re a fully equipped adult. I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but I believe Jack simultaneously taking a lot of responsibility and constantly trying to prove to others he’s useful while having childish moments is relatable to some who were forced to play an adult role at a young age. He proves a number of times that he doesn’t need everyone to take care of him, but he also has limited life experience and, as such, will make some mistakes while he’s also being a valuable member of the group. Jack constantly exists on a fine line in multiple respects. Some may see that as a writing flaw but it is who the character was conceived to be: the balance between nature or nurture, between good and evil, between savior and devil. 

Now, I was also frustrated Mary was “fridged” for a second time. It really provided no other purpose than to give the brothers more man pain to further the plot along. However, this can exist while also acknowledging that the way it happened and the subsequent fallout for Jack was also unnecessary and a sign of blatant hypocrisy from Dean, primarily, and Sam. 

And, yes, Jack can be different things at once because, I mean, can’t we all? If Mary can be both the perfect mother and the flawed, independent, distant parent, can’t Jack be the sweet kid who helps his father-figures process their own feelings on fatherhood while also being a lost young-adult forcing them to face their failures? Both characters contain multitudes because, I mean, we all do. 

I can provide articles or posts on Jack’s characterization and popularity along with Mary’s if needed, but for now I think this is a long enough ramble on my thoughts and feelings. I’m happy to discuss more, my messenger is always open for (polite) discussion. Until then, I’m going to leave it at we maybe agree to disagree. 

[monsterqueers]

New Essay Up

New essay up on the website!

props and credit to @shadowfae , whos panel on problematic sources at Othercon 2021 motivated and inspired me to write about morality differences.

Alignments - A Memory Dump Essay

Essay has also been transcribed under this readmore if thats easier to read for anyone.

Morality, in The Before, was different, in the sense that there were Allignments.

I am A Silver Dragon, from a slightly AU-ed Dungeons and Dragons world. Alignments there dictated whether you were good or evil, lawful or chaotic. You may have seen the grid around, the nine squares with things like ‘neutral good’ and ‘lawful evil’ on them. This is that.

When I say ‘good’ and ‘evil’ I mean a different concept than the behavior choices that fall into ‘doing harm’ and ‘helping people’. There were words differing between the two in dragonic, though I do not remember them now, for what I am talking about.

In this world, ‘good’, ‘evil’, ‘lawful’ and ‘chaotic’ - the dragonic forms of these words, were not behavior descriptors, nor intention descriptions. They were factions, and many species simply could not choose their born faction or change it very much if they could. These factions were generally due to god interference in the creation of that species, and it meant certain magics worked or did not work against/for them or they had traits that were often seen as harmful. The correct translation for ‘good’ and ‘evil’ is more accurately ‘darkness’ and ‘light’, though lawful and chaotic are close enough to ‘things that follow order’, and ‘things that reject order’.

These alignments said very little about the behavior they exhibited or the morals they had. The dragonic word for ‘evil’ as in how people here use it to mean ‘does harm to others’ could be retranslated as ‘being an asshole’. A person aligned lawful good could regularly commit tax fraud and beat their wife, and a person who was chaotic evil could be a pacifist who gardens and is passionate about healthcare reform.

For some of the littlefolk (the Polite translated dragonic word for humans and elves and the like), this was more flexible, and generally littlefolk would not consider those who did large amounts of harm to their in-group to be good aligned, nor people who had never done harm any worse than neutral, despite this not being the case magically speaking. It could make things rather confusing when talking to the layman, as much of the littlefolk could simply choose whatever faction they liked and often could jump ship whenever they liked too.

There were other various littlefolk somewhat limited in their alignment choice however- a Drow could not be ‘good’, and Aasimir could not be ‘evil’, for example. Usually this was split down the good and evil, rather than lawful and chaotic, as the ‘good’ and ‘evil’ deities held the most active sway.

Think of it like nationality, I suppose. Its the closest equivalent. Some people can't ever gain citizenship in a country other than their country of birth even if they want to, others can do so with a bit of work.

Dragons, however, didn’t have this sort of choice. All true dragons were born a specific alignment to do with their species, and inherent instincts to follow the tenants generally professed by that faction. This is one of the major traits that separated a True -also known as Greater- Dragon from other dragonic creatures, such as fairy dragons, wyverns, and rust dragons, actually. Other dragonic creatures had some wiggle room.

Chromatic dragons were all evil aligned, Gem dragons were all neutral aligned, and Metallic dragons were all good aligned. Planar dragons, while true dragons, were another matter and their alignments were to nothing on the scale as their origin points and commitments were beyond the gods of that my former plane’s influence. Lung dragons were a type of Planar dragon in my canon, instead of their own category.

The individual species of those groupings each had a assigned further spot. A Gold Dragon was ALWAYS Lawful Good, whether they are an abhorrent entity or not, and a White Dragon was always Chaotic Evil.

The individual species were as follows(* for ones that are AU to dnd 5e canon but are true to mine):

Chaotic Evil - Red, Black, Yellow, White

Neutral Evil - Brown, Purple*, Gray

Lawful Evil - Blue, Green

Chaotic Neutral - Topaz, Crystal

True Neutral - Amber, Amethyst, Obsidian*, Prismatic

Lawful Neutral - Emerald, Sapphire

Chaotic Good - Copper, Mercury*, Brass

Neutral Good - Silver*, Iron*

Lawful Good - Gold, Bronze, Platinum*, Steel

So I was and am a Silver Dragon. Bahumat created metallic dragons with the intention of combating His sister Tiamat, who created chromatic dragons in turn. The deities of Law and Chaos- neither touched my kind deeply. We could use all magic aligned with the light or neutral powers, and none of the dark. There was little magic that was specifically aligned with order and chaos, but all of that was accessible, provided the spell was not of the shadow. Things that repelled creatures of the light could keep me out.

The more ‘good’ creatures that existed in the world in relation to ‘evil’ ones brought more and less power to Bahumat and Tiamat in their eternal fight. So long as one ‘good’ or ‘evil’ creature existed, neither god could die and they were driven to wipe each other out. The same could be said of the law and chaos deities.

Of my life, the beginning is murky. Once I was grown enough to roam, I first Adventured with a elven rider companion and then lived upon a mountain lair until my death. Towards the middle and latter end, the towns at its base paid me rites and respect for my guardianship. These rites did technically elevate me to a minor god* capable of working greater magic. I also had a village much closer to and in my lair, one where I took those who asked my asylum who perhaps needed greater safety or guidance.

I would defend my territory and would help those who asked. It was a good life, and I hold little to no exotrauma from it.

*not to be confused with Greater gods, which are what effect Alignment or embody big concepts, minor gods are just those who are Believed in by enough people- and thus given power from that collective Belief

The divide between what was and what is is deeper and more shallow that one would expect, all at once.

I’ve started tentatively identifying as a walk-in relatively recently, my selfhood simply showed up one day and the original, whos interests, opinions, demeanor, and identity was different than mine disappeared shortly thereafter. The system has many theories on how exactly this happened, the origins thus such, and how much of the original’s ego was made into me, and also exactly when. The transition was rather seamless and there was much brain weirdness to muddle it all and convince me that I have always been here. None of us know the answer, and it generally doesn’t matter in practice.

The experiences of the original that I inherited gave a large amount of distance to this life. For reference, I Awakened as a Silver Dragon ~2014 perhaps 2015 -time is muddy- or so- having finally put together all the noema and shifts and assorted feelings that were not my cat theriotype into what they were. I had been in the body for a good handful of years previous to that, however. It gives me a distance from that life. My memories and retained selfhood from that life are dull- a botched reincarnation. I remember just enough- I experience just enough bleedover that it upholds a pillar of my identity and I still identify as the being of that life, but not so much I am exactly as-is.

I want to do a little disclaimer- The statement that this definitively IS a past life and I AM a walk in and these ARE memories of a past life is a theory, not fact. I do not and cannot know if my theory is right, and I have a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to this. My experiences could be sourced to many things, however I experience my draconity in a fashion that is similar to how others describe their past life experiences. It fits accounts better than the accounts of people who are not past-life otherkin. It feels right to describe these experiences as such, and so I do. Perhaps one day my understanding of this may change, but for now it is as such.

Returning to the topic at hand; its a point of frustration to me almost to the point of dysphoria, how good and evil, and moral and immoral are used in society here and how. Good and evil denote both the ingroup-outgroup AND the moral standard, equating sinful with strange with harmful behavior. Evil no longer means ‘entity supporting or created by Tiamat’- who is night and shadow. Good no longer means ‘entity supporting or created by Bahumat’- who is day and light.

The congruence of good with helping and evil with harming is far more intense here, Bahumat and Tiamat as I know them hold no power here- as they shouldn’t. Their place was in my old reality and that is as far as those entities reach. The assignment of moral values to enjoyment of a thing or thoughts, rather than actions is wholly new, and honestly quite unpleasant.

Evil here, becomes ‘entity that enjoys harming’ and often ‘anyone I don’t like’

Good here them also becomes ‘entity that enjoys helping’ and often ‘anyone I do like’

There will be people who insist to ignore people that do that last part and claim that it doesn’t matter- that the social realities of how others assign you do not matter, but I disagree.

Being queer, kinky, mentally ill, neurodivergent, disabled, and a strong leftist among other things means people will think me evil for existing quite a bit. Stigmatized minorities are othered, our traits become evil no matter how kind we may be.

Society calls us evil, has designated us evil- alright, how is this a bad thing?

Disassociating Evil from moral allows one to reclaim Evil. Ok, we are Evil now, but oh, no less kind. No less caring. Take the words slung at you and make armor out of them.

And also no matter how kind you may be, by this metric if you enjoy causing pain and destruction, you are evil.

This… is a thoughtcrime thing. No matter how you conduct yourself in life, if you enjoy pain you are evil to society at large. So as above, unlink Evil from Moral, and it is reclaimable.

How people assign you is a material reality you can choose to make hold no power over you. You can make it your own scales.

It is for the reason of words changing meanings, of the fact that my god I was born to does not reach here and thus frees me from obligations, that I no longer identify as Neutral Good. It simply does not mean the same thing anymore and I can now choose my alignment besides. Bahumat was no terrible god to serve or anything, but I would have appreciated the choice if it was not hardwired into my dragon brain at the time to be devoted to such a being.

I take joy in harm and at the same time take joy in helping, I think the absence of care of society is not something I can do, nor do I think rigid obedience is right.

Thus I would consider myself in the alignments of this world today as True Neutral.

Not to mention I have chosen the service of a True Neutral god in Cernunnos, so by my former world’s standards I am True Neutral now as well.

It feels right, to identify as such now. Society considers me evil enough I am too sin-stained to be good, but I have too much love of creation and helping to be wholly evil.

I believe that rules are necessary or we get Situations that cause harm to others, but at the same time am too Anarchist-leaning to not chafe under absolute order.

Still, the... Dissatisfaction with how people use alignments here persists.

[lookbluesoup]

I’ve seen a lot of talk about anti anti culture lately and an emphasis on canceling people who write stories where bad things happen (i.e., rape, molestation, abuse). I’m really interested in facilitating a positive, open space here on my blog. So sharing my personal opinion about this at all is something I thought about for a while, and my hope is that it offers a helpful perspective as well as solidarity to people who use fiction the same way as me.

It’s not directed at anyone in particular or any event in particular. The tl;dr version is – people should always have a choice, they should be allowed to read or choose not to read, they should be allowed to write and share or choose not to write or share. Taking that choice away from people ultimately hurts survivors by making topics taboo and forcing everyone to fit a specific moral narrative for their pain or experiences to be valid.

Trigger Warnings: Rape, abuse, cancel culture, child molestation, depression, suicide, dogmatic religion, homophobia

1. These things DO happen in real life, and yes, they are harmful, and yes, reading about them can be triggering. Fully, completely acknowledge all of these things and have experienced my share of it firsthand.

2. People should be allowed to know before they get invested in a story whether triggers might be present so that they can choose to avoid it if they want to. It is their choice, and responsibility to decide not to read something that is appropriately tagged. (And please, please tag appropriately!)

3. Being interested in reading about dark subjects does not make a person evil. Somewhere between 31-57 percent of women admit to having rape fantasies. (x) That does not mean women want to be raped in real life. It does not mean that half the population of women are perverted degenerates. Reading fiction, like indulging in our fantasies, is a safe place to explore and enjoy sensations, dramas, and experiences we still don’t want in real life.

In less touchy examples - I love reading about gladiator arena battles! I love playing apocalyptic games where monsters jump out of the dark and scare the shit out of me! I do not want gladiator rings or to live in an apocalypse in real life! That doesn’t mean my interest in these stories or games condones them in real life. It doesn’t mean I think it was right that Rome irl forced slaves to fight to the death for entertainment.

4. I grew up in an environment without grey areas. The dogmatic Bible-beating hatemongering kind. Someone was good and did everything right according to my beliefs and worldview, or someone was bad and a direct threat to me. If I did something wrong, I had to punish myself physically and emotionally to make up for not being perfect. I was taught to despise myself. My parents believed there was only one correct way to view any situation - their way. I was petrified of punishment and learned that it wasn’t even worth trying to do better or accommodate someone else’s experiences because I would never measure up and would be condemned for doing something that wasn’t perfect. That is immensely, cripplingly harmful to an individual and to society. Cancel culture does the same thing. It excommunicates people who aren’t pure and allows others to get by with abuse because they are ‘teaching’ or an ‘authority on morality’ – and guess what? Nobody is pure. We are all human, we all make mistakes, and we are all learning. None of us have moral authority.

We cannot build a healthy, inclusive society if we are unsafe. We cannot be safe if we are not allowed to first admit that we ALL make mistakes and have prejudices that we can improve on. So we need to be kind and nonjudgmental whenever we have the chance to be. And we have to accept and respect that what’s fun or helpful or healing for us might be the opposite for someone else, or vice versa. Which is okay if we are respectful of each other’s boundaries and don’t try to force a way of being onto someone else without their consent.

5. With regard to writing, this means that people need to be allowed to explore difficult, even painful topics if they wish to. Even for fun. Even if someone else might not want or need to explore those same topics. That doesn’t make either person inherently evil or wrong. It just means we all have different needs and wants and diversity is normal. 

As a serious example, as someone who was molested by a teenage neighbor as a child, I can guarantee you that the fact these topics were considered so disgusting and taboo by society made it very difficult for me to cope. It was not my fault, and I’ve healed from it, but when it happened I didn’t even understand what was going on, and the guilt and self-blame that followed me for years afterward were almost crippling. So yes – what happened to me in real life was wrong, inexcusable behavior. But censorship did not protect me. First it made me ignorant and vulnerable to manipulation, and then it made me feel dirty, disgusting, and isolated. 

What I needed was a safe avenue to talk about it and the thoughts and sensations it stirred up, in order to heal. I needed to know it was okay to have automatic thoughts – they were a result of fear and trauma or even just being human, not a moral failing on my part. I needed to actually talk about and explore what I had felt openly, and how that related to the rest of my life, before I could move past it and have a healthy view of intimate acts that weren’t soaked in guilt and self-loathing.

I read a book after that happened, set in ancient Rome, where pederasty took place. And the victim was allowed to admit that he’d enjoyed some of what had happened to him while enslaved, and was then assured that even though he didn’t hate everything that he experienced, it didn’t make him to blame, nor his abuser right, and those thoughts/feelings did not define him or his morality. That has been immensely healing to me – but this ‘grey’ exploration of a topic is not compatible with mainstream cancel culture.

Or alternatively, I watched the series 13 Reasons Why. I hated it. It felt like nothing but shock value entertainment and not a respectful management of topics like suicide that were very, VERY real to me. Except for someone else I knew who had also struggled with suicidal thoughts and impulses, 13 Reasons Why was immensely validating. They were glad that a series showed such graphic representation of these events in a way that couldn’t be ignored or brushed over. What had been hurtful to me, was empowering to them.

I believe it is not mine, or anyone else’s place, to decide that a piece of media should be across the board banned because of what it might do. Because while some of us share traumas, we still each have different experiences, needs, and healing processes.

Such strict censorship allows for only victims who meet a certain “standard” to receive care and healing. The rest are left to suffer or are even punished further.

All of us have gone through life with vastly different levels of privilege, opportunity, expectations, etc, which leads to vastly different interpretations of the world, none of which are 100% correct or true.

6. Cancel culture hurts LGBTQ+ rights. I’m neither straight or cis, and I might never have learned that if I hadn’t been able to build friendships outside of my social circle who allowed me to integrate and ask questions without being obligated to agree with them. Where I grew up, there was immense prejudice against gay people. My cousin was disowned and disinherited for coming out. I was sheltered from anyone who might argue for gay rights, and discouraged from looking at or being curious of the deep south’s version of ‘problematic.’ That’s what I was taught – to be uncomfortable toward, judgmental, and condemning. If I had been on tumblr during those years and gotten ‘cancelled’ I would have been even more suspicious and condemning of Others, and even more determined that my way was the only right one. I specifically avoided tumblr social circles because I ‘knew’ they hated ‘people like me.’ It’s not exclusive. This trend where people become even more convinced to pick an opposing side because the Other person is being hateful is one of the first things they teach you in social psychology. 

The kind of intolerance that goes with mobbing people for saying anything they consider problematic at all is the same cruelty that makes me unable to tell my parents I identify as agender or pan. It’s what gets women stoned to death and gays beheaded. It’s not moral. 

What changed my point of view was friendships. One of my friends came out as gay and my world turned upside down because here was someone that didn’t match any of the stereotypes I’d been taught to fear. He wasn’t hateful or condemning of me, he was one of the most thoughtful and peaceful people I knew. That is what started to change things for me, and made it safe for me to explore other ways of thinking and interpretations of scripture. Because I cared about him more than I needed to be right.

7. Nobody is obligated to interact with someone who is being violent or hateful to them. You’re not even obligated to interact with someone you disagree with, if the topic is too painful or you simply don’t want to talk about it. Keep yourselves safe. But within the world of writing, live and let live. If someone posts a story you don’t like, and they’ve tagged it appropriately, please, please consider that your experience is not universal. You have the choice not to read that story. Someone else might need to read it. Let them, and don’t shame them for it. 

[alligaytorswamp]

yellow , green , blue, turquoise , onyx , fuchsia , cream , mauve ( also genshin) & plum B)))

hey hi hello >:)

green: do you have a favourite flower?

nah i dont differentiate them.. every flower is just a flower to me jkhasjkdhkj...

if the flower is purple it gets extra points tho

blue: preferred type of weather?

rain!!! thunderstorms!!! <333

turquoise: favorite sea animal?

penguins or turtles :p

onyx: do you still play Minecraft?

nope, never did

fuchsia: favorite land animal?

cream: any piercings or tattoos? do you want any?

i have a helix one but it got fucked up.. so it looks weird :(

would love to fix it one day.. or maybe get rid of it completely hhh

no tattoos but i want some yes heheeheh

some longer answers will be under the cut jkahdsjkad

plum: a food you've never tried

oi.. dats like a lot of things... ;;

well I've never had anything "Chinese"/"Mexican"/idk what else people mention in a similar manner... i hear English-speaking folks refer to these.. "types" and yep never had any of that. also like.. any food chains that just don't exist in Russia? obv nope......... there is probably an insane amount of stuff I haven't tried, I'm picky and literally just eat at home 99% of the time so-

yellow: name of an artist you think is underappreciated

gonna give a dumb ass answer but... i can't...? i don't really know how much one should be "appreciated", like what is the "right amount" and whether or not this person receives it. the amount of notes/likes doesn't always represent that and also i don't look there at all.. also this one random artist can have multiple accs on different platforms with different engagements and all that... so how do i really know what's up with them? and once again i don't think i sit around thinking Damn this person needs more likes !! .. i just like/rb whatever i want and it's epic lashdjlksajdlk also i'm not sure if i have strong attachments to certain creators.. (at this point that is. i used to and some of it backfired lmao) ... the only attachments i have r ppl i'm friends with which is U Know... considered the right answer to this question and an adequate person would do just that but damn none of yall getting a free promo wtf 🙄 and i feel like mentioning one friend could lead to upsetting another or like .. i could just forget to tag someone... or I would waste time trying to figure out if it would be ok to mention them in an ask like this one and probably would decide against it anyways just not to bother anybody ....

and is getting tagged in a post saying u r underappreciated even a compliment? because i for one am not too sure about that........... much to think about uh huh

mauve: any unpopular opinions?

we entered danger zone.................... beware :з

uhhh well first of all I think childe x zhongli is like the most pathetic and boring "default" pairing this fandom came up with. they have 0 chemistry and I just hate everything about it. as much as I headcanon both as queers... together romantically it feels like 2 straight men put together by ya*i fans............ also before i blacklisted to ship and voluntarily looked through the ship tag... every post felt like a hard ooc. i could not understand what childe or zhongli are supposed to be as individuals, what they have in common, what kind of dynamic they have. deadass most crack ships with 0 interactions have more flavor than this tragedy

eng VAs are great people and appreciate their work but whoever decides the voices ain't doing it right. every male character sounds like a middle-aged white man.. and most of the youngest characters sound like very obvious adults trying to pretend to be babies. all of it irks me so bad god.. and there are so many characters that lose their little spark in eng........ (yet in korean and chinese they're completely fine??)

all of the playable adult male characters are shitty people in one way or another. none of them are good. they have reasons and different perspectives, yes, but they suck. every single one of them. stop ignoring it or trying to say only some are evil. none of them are inherently terrible.. but they're not these precious and righteous individuals. they're men.................... that says a lot, actually. :\

and as for women? god i hate the idea that they're all so uninteresting and weak. lichrally just a bunch of girlbosses, morals of most could be questioned as well... anyways some of the girls not having extremely dramatic stories doesn't make them any less cool. let them be

also all archons suck it's ok. you can still love them while acknowledging that they've done some shit. ALSO stop demonizing venti .. and now baal, while praising zhongli- he's an old loser stop lying to yourself. i hate when people present him as the only good archon, the voice of reason who is just so cool and collected but also ahh so cutely silly about mora !!!............. bitch the story quest of liyue is just one zhongli-is-a-fucking-moron campaign idk did yall skip it or something............ and even then it's ok to like him, he does have his logic/reasons/beliefs that justify his actions... he is not a good guy or archon tho.

shipping archons/adepti/whatever the fuck that isn't a basic human with a basic human is super weird. i mean the power dynamic will be completely fucked and ages? lord almighty... basically mortals should stay with mortals... the rest goes to baby jail except maybe ganyu she's a good girl

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh idk what else.................

maybe.. ahha... well.............. with how people hype up any vague new character that is leaked and declare how they will skip every banner ever for them - even tho all we know is... how the character looks like? it feels a bit too much. like truly what's the point of going crazy and then screaming at mihoyo every 3 seconds over some character that could be fake for all we know, or maybe they'll be a support you don't need, or they have a weapon you don't like to use.... can't you just wait till we get official info? jesus lawd- but regardless.......................... where is the same energy for baizhu :)

the man is literally in the game and people manage to forget him even in conversations about dendro specifically- how the fuck is that even real-

thanks for watching everybody don't forget to subscribe smash that like button and hit the notification bell ^_^

[a-student-out-of-time]

Connections Review Part 2

This isn’t your average Love Hotel Event, this is an ADVANCED Love Hotel Event

Here we go people, we have returned and now it’s time for the next part of the review of Connections! Last time was quickly reviewing stuff that didn’t warrant its own part and all the time travelling discoveries into the Ultimate Seer Mikako, she is the Ultimate Seer now, not the Ultimate Exorcist, and some interesting visions. And in this part, we cover the stuff that everyone likes to talk about which is Harems! Whether it be Cuddle Puddle, Hotel Akane or Makoto’s currently unnamed Harem. Point is this Blog is a goldmine for Poly relationships and let the looovvveee spread! So, time for some fluffy reviews~

I’ll start with the only established harem at this point in time which is the Cuddle Puddle! Hotel Akane is planned for but still in development and we don’t even know if Makoto will be willing to go for a harem. So, the big major event which happens here is Hajime fixing the issues with Hiyoko’s family. She has serious issues with her grandmother as she forbids her from seeing her parents, and while Hiyoko can’t give a rat’s arse about her mother, she very much cares about her father, and as heir of her clan, Hiyoko has to marry a man of suitable status which Hajime doesn’t fulfil. So, with Izumi summoning Hiyoko back home to have a talk, Hajime joins her in order to try and get the racist boomer to approve of their relationship, and allow Hiyoko to see her parents, or her father to be more precise. This was a welcome relief mission because having fought two serial killers, busted a human trafficking ring and about to fight a cult, just talking to a racist problematic member of one of his girlfriend’s family is a very light mission for Hajime. Plus, because we all don’t like boomers having a boomer being called out for their racist and out of touch ways is catharsis at best. It helps that not all of the Sannoji family is completely terrible as Monoko and Teru, relatives of Hiyoko were more open minded, and agreed with Hiyoko and Hajime’s sentiments and if they weren’t there, I don’t think the meeting with Izumi would have gone well.

Thankfully, Hajime & Hiyoko, with the help of Momoko and Teru, were able to get Izumi to bless their relationship and since Sannoijis marry young, as soon as Hiyoko graduates, or ‘graduates’ because remember Hopes Peak Academy will only remain open for as long as Junko lurks and as soon as she’s defeated, Nikei’s article on why Hope’s Peak Academy is twisted and corrupted will be put up and the school won’t last long, she wants to marry Hajime. This brings up a legal problem with the Cuddle Puddle as Poly relationships are illegal in Japan, in fact I think they’re illegal in a lot of countries. Novoselic which is Sonia’s kingdom its legal, but Sonia can’t ask for everyone to uproot their lives and move there. The temporary solution is for everyone not named Sonia and Gundham to legally change their last name to Hinata, Hajime marries Hiyoko and when Kiyotaka becomes Prime Minister and he legalizes Poly Marriage, marry the other girls then. That’s a long-term solution though.

As for the rest of the Cuddle Puddle, they are bonding well. Gundham got a bit of focus on this Arc and I’m glad for it. The biggest issues with the Cuddle Puddle as it is very Hajime-centric but we don’t see how the girls interact with each other or even Gundham as he’s the other male in the harem as well. Gundham himself doesn’t get many interactions aside from Hajime and Sonia, so seeing him open up to Hibiki about his past and she comforting his worries about Storm is heart-warming. I always knew that Hibiki had a strong liking for Gundham as even back during the Concert Arc when Sonia and Gundham met the Otonokoji twins on their independent mission to find the ‘stalker’ of them, Hibiki took a liking to Gundham’s Chuunibyou nature almost immediately, and given all the growth that Hibiki has gone through since then, she is now in a position to comfort others much like how she was comforted by them. Gundham’s backstory is the usual brand of familial outcast and a devoted mother who gave her life into Gundham that too many people in the Quantum Crew have. Kodaka did say one of the pillars of being a Danganronpa character is having a broken family and it shows.

While the Cuddle Puddle got some development, it won’t be the only harem this blog has so let’s look at the founding of a new one, which is Hotel Akane. It’s an unofficial rule that the protagonists of the Killing Games get their own harems, but Sora doesn’t want a harem as she is content with having a relationship with just Yoruko so she transferred her ‘harem rights’ to Akane, who being one of the horniest members of the cast, is more then happy for that. Akane is seeing Ayame at the moment but they haven’t officially started dating yet, its still in the friendship phase at the moment. This will develop into romance at some point though, but Akane is considerate enough to go things at a gradual pace. Yuki makes his first appearance in this arc as well as he shops at the new supermarket that Akane is working for, and we get to see Sora’s conflict over Yuki. Due to Sora’s purpose in the Killing Game, being created to protect Yuki until Mikado could break him, she is worried as she doesn’t know how much of her affection for Yuki is of her free will or due to the protocols that Mikado programmed into her. Akane reassures her that her love for Yuki is of free will as when Sora broke free from Mikado’s programming shackles, her first act was to protect Yuki from Mikado, and the two did genuinely bond over the course of the Killing Game. As such Akane meeting and potentially getting romantically involved with Yuki is A-OK in Sora’s books. But of course, that’s not the relationship you guys care about. You care about Servant’s Column AKA the relationship between Akane and Nikei. And quite a lot of progress was made there as we get to see how conflicted our poor reporter is. Due to Nikei’s highly disturbing backstory, he is unsure on what his sexual ordination is. The other Voids know where they swing but Nikei despite his best efforts doesn’t know what his type is. This isn’t a situation that is going to be resolved quickly as victims of sexual abuse do struggle with sexual identity and I could see a situation when Nikei winds up being asexual as a result of the whole thing. We know that Nikei has a habit on crushing on anyone who is remotely kind to him, something I relate to on a personal level, and that he’s okay with PDAs, but anything sexual is completely off limits to him as it would give Nikei traumatic flashbacks to his past. Given the strong likelihood of Miaya getting involved next arc, he really needs to speak to her as she could help him with getting to gripes with his past and sexual identity and allow himself to heal. And Nikei does need to learn how to be comfortable with himself before he can be okay with entering a relationship with Akane.

And now for the last harem and the only one without a name and that is Makoto’s harem. Thing is though, this is the harem I’m the most on the fence about. Because…is it going to exist? Cuddle Puddle are a thing, Hotel Akane is going to be a thing, but Makoto hasn’t made any noises about wanting to get into relationships with other girls, he’s may just be content having a relationship with Iroha. Granted he hasn’t even met the other girls who would be part of his harem and he won’t for a while so maybe attitudes change once the other girls become aware of him and he starts talking to them. The big event regarding this is that Makoto Naegi’s Worst Day ever happens during this Arc, which is the highly elaborate chain of events which leads to Makoto entering Hope’s Peak. I won’t talk much about this; it goes like it does in canon and just read it up online if you want details. Iroha wants to help Makoto during this but due to the enormous butterfly effects resulting from it, no interference can be done and it’s probably the only time we allow the Ankle Effect to make its noises. The results shows that the Ankle Effect isn’t an inherently evil force, it just wants history to stay the same. Unfortunately, history is tainted and the world would end if it is prevented so the Quantum Crew do have to meddle. The one thing Iroha CAN do with Makoto on his worst day ever is to comfort him and make his night memorable for all the right reasons. He is going to be a character though who would become more centric to the plot as soon as Junko enters the scene…unless things happen and he gets in sooner. I could see Makoto getting tangled up with dealing with Mikado as he has some association with the Voids now, and I think Makoto will NOT sit ideally if Mikado tries to mess with the Voids. As for Storm…I dunno.

And that’s all the harem developments, Hajime resolves Hiyoko’s family issues, Gundham exists in the Cuddle Puddle, Sora has Yuki identity problems, Nikei really needs as much hugs as possible and Makoto has an awful day, but he gets to be in line to being the hero of civilization and makes out with Iroha so all is good! At this point I would normally make my rankings but then a certain Motherfucker decided to get more screen time and thus he needs his own part. When we come back, I will discuss the most problematic part of the Arc, which is Maverick Storm. Until then byeeeee! - Review Anon

[ajokeformur-ray]

Hey, can you talk more about your f/os from k-drama Black? I've never seen or heard about that tv show but having Grim Reapers as a comfort f/o seems interesting. I'd love to hear you talk more about them.. but, of course, it's okay if you don't want to share about them yet or ever 🥰🥰 <3

Hi, darling!💖 How are you? I really miss talking to you and I hope that you're safe and well afghjkl🥺🥺🥺

I'm so sorry that it took me so long to respond to this! I've not really known how to answer this question. I am more than happy to discuss any of my beautiful F/Os at any time, but with my Grim Reaper F/Os it's quite complicated because so much of who they are is something I can't really explain unless you watch Black because it's... rife with spoilers. For most of the show you don't really know who the characters are right up until the last five episodes and then everything which confused you across the whole time you watched the show begins to make sense and it's only on the second re-watch that you fully begin to appreciate the genius of the show writers. It's without a doubt my absolute favourite K-Drama (and I've watched most of the ones which are on Netflix so I've watched... a fair few ksksksk). I really can only say so much about this to answer your question and that makes it difficult😂 I do love a challenge, though, so I'll try my best!💛

Under a cut due to mentions of suicidal ideation (mine; I go into some detail), mentions of trauma (mine; unspecified), Death and its personification, Grim Reapers (obviously) and some emotional heaviness (mine and within the narrative of the show). 

Please do NOT read this if any of these things may potentially upset or trigger you.

Okay so my Grim Reaper F/Os are #007 and #444. My dynamic with them is very uncertain – I just know that I love them and that's good enough for me! They are very much comfort characters for me. The show came out in 2017 (or maybe 2018...I'm not too sure) and at that time in my life, I had just gotten out of a very bad situation and as a result of that trauma I was experiencing suicidal ideation, among other things. I wanted, more than anything, to just... cease to exist. I didn't want to die, but I didn't want to be alive, either. The role of Grim Reapers is different in every culture, and every K-Drama which features them portrays them in a different way. This K-Drama is my favourite portrayal of Grim Reapers; Death is a friend to humans and Grim Reapers accompany them throughout their life. They exist among humans and only at the point of death are you collected by the one who was assigned to you. The Grim Reaper who witnesses the days leading up to your death (and follows you around for that time, watching, waiting...) is also the one who takes you to your afterlife, whether that's up or down is determined by the purity of your soul. So Death is a friend and your Grim Reaper is beside you when you greet Death.

I found and I do still find a lot of comfort in the thought that I'm never truly alone, due to the fact that Death is always waiting for us (according to this K-Drama). The personification of Death through these Grim Reaper characters struck a very deep chord within me when I very first watched the show and they gave me a reason to live. There are eighteen episodes which are ninety minutes long each so it's a very long, very complicated and utterly immersive K-Drama and the acting is flawless. Every single character is real in the sense that you can feel them; their emotions are raw, their personalities are properly fleshed out and they have very real flaws and they make mistakes and there are true and genuine connections. There's evil people and there's good people who are just doing their best and there's harrowing subplots and heart-warming moments and it's truly the most stunning production I've ever seen in any kind of media.

I highly recommend it, seriously. It's well worth watching, though I would absolutely heed the warnings which feature on the beginning page of every single episode. This show is quite shocking but it's also very real in its depictions and characterisations and it's... honestly amazing. So that's the show. And the characters asdfghjkl.

I feel very protective over #444 especially. He is... there's little I can say because he's the main character of the show and it's all centred around him and his life and right up until the very last few episodes you don't realise just how integral he is to all the characters in the show. He is the circle in the middle of a mind map with all arrows and sub-categories coming off of his name. He is tragedy embodied and omg... every time he cries, I cry. It's just instinctive for me. I cannot get through a single scene during which he cries without me crying, too. I feel very deeply for him and I empathise so much. He truly has such a horrific plot and... oh, god, I'm tearing up just remembering about it all. He is sarcastic and intelligent and he will do what is right no matter the consequences. He loves deeply, though he takes... a very long time to accept his own humanity, and he's... just a joy to be around. But he's also very inherently sad because of who he is and what happened to him and what happens to him.

Here he is:

Picture credit

Isn't he beautiful? 😭😭😭😭His eyes remind me of a doe’s skskskk there are multiple characters in the show who say the same thing so I’m not alone in that.

And then #007 omggggg I love him. 🥺🥺🥺 He's the oldest Grim Reaper in the show and he is... tragic, too. When a Grim Reaper's body is found, their soul finally passes into the afterlife, but #007 is so old that by now his body is dust. He will never be found so he will never be at peace and he knows it and he has been with #444 his whole life. I can't say anything here either because of spoilers, but he really is just... he's my favourite. I love him so much skskskk he's so sarcastic and he's a stickler for the rules and for the societal hierachy, he loves the same kind of K-Dramas that I do and he's just... he's very wise and he's very old and very tired and he just... oozes this sense of all-knowing. He has quite literally seen it all and nothing surprises him. He has humanity and he has empathy and he cares for every good soul he collects and he feels nothing for the bad souls. He is... willing to do anything for the people (Grim Reapers) he cares about and he follows that through to the bitter end even if he doesn't personally agree with what he's being asked to do.

Here he is:

Picture credit

🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺 My UWUS 🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺

I find lots of comfort in this show and in these two characters especially and they kept me alive in what is arguably the darkest time of my life thus far. They inspire me and comfort me and, quite honestly, they taught me so much and I've re-watched the K-Drama about six times by now and it never fails to invoke the same emotions within me like it's the first time all over again. I often like to think that they're with me throughout my daily life; within the canon of the show they can get attached to certain humans (though it is forbidden) and I like to think that they've seen me grow and heal and succeed and fail and mourn and love and everything in between ever since I first saw the show, and I like to think that they know that I love my Grim Reapers.🥺😭💖💖💖 I hold them close to me and I feel for them deeply and the show will, ironically, stay with me forever.

When I’m feeling so terribly that nothing else and no one else can comfort me, I will crawl into bed no matter what the time of the day is or how busy I am (my university work can wait even if it’s urgent; but my well-being cannot so I always come first. Nothing is worth the cost of my mental health), and I will watch even just twenty minutes of a single episode. That’s all I need - twenty minutes. And then... I feel my Grim Reapers around me and I know that I can carry on. Some days I lean on them heavily and then there are periods of months where I don’t even think of them, but some event or some feeling will have me returning to them at some point and it will be like I never left. There’s nothing they can’t understand and there’s nothing they haven’t seen and I find so much comfort in that.

Thank you so much for asking, my love, your interest means the world to me!💙 Please feel free to ask me anything at any time and I'll do my best to answer! I hope that you're safe and well and I'm thinking of you!💜

[bigskydreaming]

Saying that a fictional depiction of a rape is the same as promoting rape is like saying that writing a story about a character being gaybashed is promoting gaybashing. If you have the right to write a story based on your experiences, why don't I? Also, where's the line between depiction and romanticisation? There is none. At all. -- queer survivor who will not let you or anyone silence me.

Literally not something I’ve ever said, so congrats on the reading comprehension and thanks for being the 8,647th person to hop in my inbox or on one of my posts about this subject and attempt to make it about everything EXCEPT for things I actually have said and believe.

And for the record, there is a very clear line between depiction and romanticisation, are you kidding me??? Do you even get how communication works?

A work of fiction that essentially says “here are events that happened,” is a depiction.

A work of fiction that essentially says “here are events that happened, and the way in which they happened is intended to be received as sexy or romantic, as is further evidenced by reader reception in the form of comments about how sexy or romantic that depiction of events that happened was,”

....THAT is romanticization.

I am so, so, soooooooooo endlessly tired of being engaged by people who insist on being willfully dishonest and hypocritical about how much power they perceive fiction as having.

Every other day of the week, fanfic is empowering because it gives literally any of us a platform with which to reach other fans and express our own ideas, storylines and emotions regarding characters we all share an interest in.

But the second THIS conversation comes up, in ANY of its myriad forms, suddenly you’re all like, “ummmmm.....I am just a helpless little author who has never shaped anything I’ve ever written with any kind of specific intent or goal towards how I want the audience to receive or perceive my story?? I wouldn’t even know how to go about doing that? Is that even a thing?”

You all know damn well the difference between a story that depicts rape, pedophilia and incest, and a story that romanticizes/sensationalizes/uses those things as the specific elements that are supposed to result in that story being sexually gratifying to readers who engage with it.

Like, lmfao, I’m not the prude anyone makes me out to be, any more than I’m this evil censor about to go into all your houses and strip you of your ability to write whatever you want. Shockingly, guess what? I’ve written erotica myself! Not about those topics, clearly, but I’ve literally written and sold stories that I wrote with the specific intention of being perceived as erotic, sexy, romantic, etc.....

BECAUSE I, LIKE MOST OTHER WRITERS, KNOWS HOW TO GEAR A STORY IN VARIOUS DIRECTIONS WITHOUT HAVING TO ACTUALLY INCLUDE THE HEADERS “THIS PART IS JUST A DEPICTION” AND “OKAY NOW THIS PART YOU SHOULD THINK IS SEXY.”

LOLOL I’m so fucking tired. Literally the only message I have ever expressed on this subject in all the years I’ve been posting about it, on my own damn blog, in my own damn threads, with people like you always being the one to come and engage ME and still somehow operate under the impression that YOU’RE the ones being silenced here, like I’m the one going around to shut down everything YOU’RE saying every time you even open your mouth on a specific subject.....

Like, did I make that clear enough? Was the irony pointed enough there? Is it maybe sinking in a little, the utter ABSURDITY of people like you streaming into my inbox night after night, week after week, to yell “STOP SILENCING ME, I WILL NOT BE OPPRESSED OR CENSORED BY YOU”.....

When I literally have no idea who most of you are, thus couldn’t silence you even if I WANTED to, which again, is not something I’ve ever even expressed, given that my message on this subject over. And over. And over. And over. AND ALWAYS AND CONSISTENTLY IS:

I am not for censorship. Not only do I hate censorship, I don’t view it as even slightly effective, and at most its like trying to slap a bandaid on top of a wound without any attempt to even examine the injury itself and see how it came to be and what it really needs to be effectively treated.

My viewpoints on this subject have always been about one thing and one thing only: personal accountability.

As in, I advocate for people to just fucking apply a little more awareness to their OWN power, their OWN impact, their OWN platform....even if that platform is only fanfiction on the internet, yes.

Power and impact and influence are all still there, even among fanfic writers, as anyone who’s ever posted or reblogged about the legitimacy of fanfiction as a form of fiction, like, already damn well knows, so its so exasperating seeing that fly right out the window the second anyone asks a fanfic writer to scrutinize their own work to even just make sure THEY THEMSELVES are okay with ALL the potential impacts of whatever it is they’re writing.

Fiction is just language. Language is just a tool for communicating ideas, intents, emotions, experiences and more.

And like literally any other tool in the history of humanity, for this is literally the nature of tools and how they work....

A tool has no inherent ‘goodness’ that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to be wielded in a way that produces harm. It simply exists. And its capacity to help or to harm, to be used in positive ways or negative ways.....depends SOLELY on its wielder and how they apply that tool and to what ends.

Fiction, whether the kind on bookshelves in stores or the kind found only on Ao3....has tremendous power. It communicates new ideas to people who’ve never considered a certain point of view before. It conveys new experiences to people who would never encounter something depicted firsthand in their own day to day lives. It conveys emotions, imbued into the narrative by the author themselves, even if those emotions are not necessarily always what the author thinks they are or intended them to be or not always ones readers truly read into the text versus simply project onto the text themselves. 

But there are an infinite variety of ways in which fiction has power, has impact, can and does reach people. It connects people, linking them via shared experiences or viewpoints or ideas so that a reader seeing themselves represented in what an author is writing can at least say they’re not alone, there’s someone else out there who says or thinks or experiences things similar to them. It can persuade people, exposing them to new viewpoints they’ve never considered before and convincing them of their validity by the arguments written into the text, even if they were never intended that way or the author might not even consciously be aware of making an argument in the text. It can fortify people, reassuring them that a perspective they have on a subject does have validity because here in this story, there’s someone thinking the same things for the same reasons. It can help people heal or even just hold on long enough to heal, by seeing their own tragedies reflected in a fictional mirror that still manages to impart that healing and recovery after something tragic are possible, that there is potentially more good still to come, in a reader’s life just as in a character’s story.

All I have ever expressed, over and over and over, is that its important to always keep sight of the fact that because fiction is just a tool, and not any more infallible than any writer using it to convey their thoughts and ideas and emotions.....

Fiction DOES still have just as much power to harm, too, if wielded irresponsibly. Everything I just detailed above has a flip side. Its a two way street, it can go both ways. Fiction can just as easily connect bigoted people, white supremacists, homophobes, transphobes, etc.....via shared experiences or viewpoints that reflect and empower the perspectives of bigots, etc. It can persuade people to do or think things that aren’t healthy, by exposing them to toxic viewpoints and convincing them of their validity due to a reader being vulnerable to various arguments that are made in bad faith. And no, this does not mean that I’m saying people run out and do what they see depicted or even romanticized in fiction. I’m simply saying fiction holds every capacity to convince people of the validity of something harmful as much as something healing.....it all just depends on how important that particular thing or argument is to their specific lives, how vulnerable or exposed they are to particular arguments, how much weight they give it, etc, etc. There are a ton of factors here. All I’m saying is this IS a factor, its included among those many, many other things. 

Moving on....it can fortify the worst kind of people, reassure them that their prejudices or toxic viewpoint on a subject has validity because a story is seemingly endorsing it without any sign within the narrative that the characters’ perspective on this matter IS flawed, or toxic or unhealthy or prejudiced, rather than just a straight forward and unbiased depiction. And yes, it can hinder personal healing or recovering, by keeping a reader mired in the same kind of thoughts or emotions they’re already currently battling and reinforcing their personal perception that there is no alternative to those things, etc, etc.

None of these are in any way a given, with any given story, any given writer, any given reader. There are tons of variables, as I said.

But also as I’ve said....my only point has always just been that these things EXIST, the potential for these things to happen in this or that way EXISTS, and it is willfully dishonest of fanfic writers and readers to insist on the power of fanfiction to help, to heal, to connect people......while simultaneously trying to absolve themselves of even the need to be CAREFUL with how they wield the power of fiction, because apparently, with fanfiction, its ONLY ever a one way street. Fanfiction NEVER has the power to harm, to reinforce negative or prejudiced perspectives, impart and convince readers of toxic viewpoints and arguments.

How can you pretend that’s not how this works? That saying la la la, I’m JUST a fanfic writer, I only have a couple hundred readers maybe, so by virtue of that, somehow, only good things can result from my writing, there’s noooooooo possible negative impact to any of my work or various ideas I put forth....

Like, that isn’t a thing! LOLOL. That’s not a disclaimer with any power or truth. All it is, is a fandom-spread and perpetuated lie meant to reassure people that here in this space, there is a kind of power that unlike ALL OTHER FORMS OF POWER IN EXISTENCE.....can only ever be a good thing, a positive thing...and thus there is no need for any one in a fandom space, whether writer or reader, to ever have to be on their guard or careful about what they say or believe the way they have to be ‘in the outside world.’ Here, in fandom, you can finally just RELAX, you can just enjoy yourself and have fun and not have to worry about whether you’re doing or saying the wrong thing because none of those things are even a POSSIBILITY here, and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to tarnish our perfect paradise, let the ugliness of the outside world into it via unnecessary and unasked for criticism and scrutiny that isn’t fair to apply here because its not like any of us have any real power, we’re just fans, writing stuff on the internet.

And people are just...DETERMINED not to accept that, or to even LOOK at it as the actual subject being discussed in a lot of these conversations. So you spin everything I and others like me say, turn them into arguments we’ve never actually espoused, warn against the perils of censorship we’ve never actually asked or advocated for, stand tall against the attempts to silence you...THAT HAVE NEVER ACTUALLY EXISTED.

Like....the message that bothers me, the communication that I personally am disturbed by seeing practically everywhere I look in fandom? Yes....its the message conveyed by the mere existence, the sheer volume of fics that depict traumas exactly like mine....but in ways that sexualize them, make them seem more about erotic fantasy rather than the abuses of power that they are in real life. I hate these kinds of stories, and just how damn MUCH of them there are, its true. I’m not denying it, I’ve never denied it. To me, them and all the hundreds and thousands of kudos and comments they receive - even without reading the fics directly, just via a mere AWARENESS that these conversations are taking place, no matter how hard I try to pretend otherwise - to me, the message being conveyed over and over by them is that in the right light, from the right angle, things that happened to me at various points in my life are HOT, are SEXY.....

Like as an example, since apparently it seems I’ve been using my ‘gaybashed’ card too freely and unfairly shutting down conversations like this (lol again, let’s not forget, conversations that I begin, on my own blog, and that not a damn one of you is forced to interact with no matter how hard to play the STOP SILENCING angle when voluntarily approaching ME and trying to shame or guilt ME into not talking so much about this topic, aka SILENCING MEEEEEEEEEE)...

Anyway, all that aside, for this example let me pull from something I don’t talk about as much: the years when I was an escort in my late teens and early twenties, literally getting into bed with much older and extremely predatory men because I needed the money....AND because I was using this in part as a ‘coping mechanism’ to convince myself that sex had no power to hurt me. That thus by doing this I was retroactively taking away my rapes’ ability to harm me in the first place, and thus, I had never really been harmed and was FINE..... Except I was very much NOT okay, I absolutely ended up revictimized and further traumatizing myself because a lot of the people I interacted with at that period of my life were NOT good people and DIDN’T have a care for my best interests or even safety, even while saying and doing all the right things, the sexy things, even the romantic things...

I mean, I’m just saying....I could absolutely, without a doubt, write some of my own life experiences, things that were traumatizing to me and have left lingering scars....I could take some of those and write them in such a way as to have a sexualized or romanticized slant, publish them on Ao3 with names swapped out for some fictional characters and call it an AU.......and I for sure would get comments and kudos about how hot all of that was.

Now, I have no interest in doing that, obviously....but the thing is, I don’t HAVE to. Because those stories already EXIST, even if they don’t exactly match up to my specific experiences and they’re written by people who literally have no idea I even exist, let alone have lived through scenes eerily similar to what they write.

And just like those stories exist....the comments, and the kudos, and the praise and the glorification of these stories, the events depicted within them, the DYNAMICS depicted within them....these already exist as well. And I’m painfully, PAINFULLY aware of that. Every day. Every fandom I’m in. Every fandom I’ve ever been in.

And it SUCKS. I hate knowing that two posts down from some story I’m reading, there’s a story that has people drooling over the exact kind of predator that fucked with me and my head so much back in those years. I hate stumbling into an untagged AU every once in awhile and finding Bruce being depicted as Dick’s sugar daddy, preying on the MUCH younger man that we all normally associate with being his SON.....and knowing from past experience that if I click on the comments, almost without a doubt, judging by the 22 comments on one chapter alone, I’ll find enough swooning over how HOT and ROMANTIC this is, that it will most likely make me violently ill for the rest of the night. Because I so INTIMATELY know that there is NOTHING safe or healthy or not fucking traumatizing about that kind of dynamic with a person who is SUPPOSED to be safe and trustworthy to be around.......and I’m reminded all over again, just like I have been at SO MANY points in my life....how many people just don’t want to HEAR this, because they prefer their fantasy over the reality I know firsthand....BUT NONE OF THAT MAKES MY REALITY ANY LESS REAL OR LIVED THROUGH.

The thing so many of you don’t get is....none of this is even about whether I read these stories or not, none of it is about whether all of them get tagged properly or not....hell, none of it is actually about whether the people writing these fics are actually pedophiles or ‘endorsing’ these things or anything like that....I NEVER ARGUE ANY OF THAT, BECAUSE NONE OF IT IS THE POINT.

The point is just....the sheer bombardment of a singular message across so many fandoms, so many pairings, from so many people....

With that message being, to a very wide audience....with the right character in the right scenario....the things that for various people like myself and other survivors who DON’T like being surrounded by all this either, whether or not there are many survivors who for whatever reason DO find themselves okay with it... 

(And considering our existence and arguments don’t invalidate your acceptance of these things, why do you so confidently tout the idea that YOUR existence and arguments should somehow innately just make all of this less objectionable to us? Just curious.)

The point is, no matter who is writing these stories or why, whether they ACTUALLY endorse these things or would never in a million years find them acceptable in real life (and again, why are you so confident that this is true for EVERYONE who writes these things, and by extension, why the FUCK do you presume its okay to expect all survivors to just give EVERYONE the benefit of the doubt as to why they’re writing these stories, when some of them are virtually indistinguishable from the kinds of things someone who DID find these things hot and sexy to enact on others in real life, would write themselves)....

Like.....none of that matters. Because none of that in any way affects the reality so many of us experience in fandom spaces:

That over and over we’re reminded that what was devastatingly traumatic for us, and impacts every day of our lives ever since.....to a wide audience of others, is just a hot, sexy fantasy and they’re all crying out MORE, MORE, GIVE US MORE.

And you all just sit back there and just us for saying....”it really bothers us to be surrounded by this message everywhere we turn.”

You shame US for saying this makes our fandom environment toxic and hostile at times.....and you flip the script and ask how dare WE shame survivors, who are probably just using these fics to cope....and literally ALL the people reading and writing these fics are survivors probably, I mean, you don’t know....and of course it’d be wildly inappropriate to ask so its probably best to just assume everyone writing these things are survivors....and thus we, no matter if we are survivors ourselves, have no business SHAMING or SILENCING them for just working through their shit in ways that its not even like it can actually hurt us anyway.

Except it DOES. It IS. And we say that, and you REFUSE TO HEAR US. You say “well this isn’t true for me, so it can’t be true for you or else just doesn’t matter if it is,” even though at no point have I or others I know ever said “because this is true for me, I am assuming it to be true for all survivors.”

You come into MY inbox, and act like you’re standing tall and proud against MY silencing tactics. Yeah, would I love it if I could go even a single day without having to gingerly avoid these stories and all mention of them, all casual references to them, all glowing praise of them, everywhere I look in fandom? Absofuckinglutely. Does me WANTING this thing - this thing we all know is never in actual danger of happening, lol - does this in ANY way ACTIONABLY translate into me censoring anyone, impeding anyone’s ability to write or post or read these things, is it me going in the comments of any of these fics and yelling HOW DARE YOU WRITE THIS and when that doesn’t get me the response I want, going to the blogs of the writers and yelling I WILL NOT BE SILENCED?

No. No. And fuck no. None of these things are happening, none of these things are reality.

And yet here you are, like SOOOOOOO MANY before you and like SOOOOOO MANY who will inevitably follow you in the future....

And your condescension and disdain for me and everything I think and everything I’ve lived through and my willingness or even just the way I choose to talk about it, just JUMPS off the page.

But the thing that will never not just absolutely fucking SLAY me, is the sheer absurdity of the accusations you and so many others level against me for MY censorship, MY shaming of other survivors. MY silencing tactics or whatever....

When you consider the fact that, yeah, I would love not having to see all these stories and other related things every single day. I would LOVE it.

But I’m not doing a single damn thing to make that a reality, to make that a DANGER, a THREAT to you and the thing you enjoy.....

Other than posting about it on my blog, and expressing how I feel about it, and arguing why I wish other people would spend more time considering perspectives like mine on the matter.

That’s it. That’s the whole grand conspiracy. That’s my awful and terrible assault on you and your autonomy and your freedom of speech and your interests and likes.

And meanwhile, here you are, stepping forward to confront ME in my own space about things I’ve said here and nowhere else that you’re forced to engage with and interact with and incapable of avoiding....

And you have the utter GALL to tell ME that YOU will not be silenced by the likes of me.

When every single person who reads this knows DAMN well that you and others like you only send me all these anons......

Because you want me to shut up and just never talk about these things again, as much if not more than I wish all these people would not even stop writing.....but rather just....would consider writing literally ANYTHING else instead.

But somehow, for some reason....when YOU want ME to stop talking....you’re not trying to silence me, or censor me, or any of those other things, oh know.

Its just me talking about my own damn feelings, experiences and opinions on my own damn blog.

THAT’S the real threat to fandom togetherness, community, and freedom of speech and personal autonomy.

LOL. Awfully convenient, wouldn’t you say?

But whatever. Its all good, anon. You go ahead and keep the moral high ground here. You’ve earned it, clearly.

[moonlitgleek]

Isn't Rhaegar absolved from his actions due to the fact that the prophecy is true and his son with Lyanna is the savior of the human race? Isn't Jaehaerys II absolved from his since the prophecy was true and TPTWP, in fact, is born of Aerys and Rhaella's line? I know we can mull over how Rhaegar could have done things differently to get his third child, but it seems that it was destiny. With Jaehaerys II, there wasn't even another option but to force the marriage to fulfill the prophecy.

Neither is absolved, no. Because the ends do not justify the means, and destiny is only what we make of it.

So many characters in this series act on the rationale that the greater good merits any number of sacrifices made in its name, which is also often used to justify and minimize blatant atrocities. Varys plays with people’s lives and maims children on the thought that King Aegon will right all the wrongs in Westeros. Mel argues that burning children alive is a necessary price for the survival of everyone else. Rhaegar treats the thousands of lives lost over the course of the rebellion as an acceptable collateral damage for a prophetic enterprise. Stannis is on the path to fall to that same viewpoint of a necessary sacrifice (”we do not choose our destinies” You do, Stannis. You do. You’re the only one who can choose). Robert’s council tries to frame Dany’s assassination attempt in the context of how ending two lives would spare thousands. Tywin tries to spin the Red Wedding as something that spares countless lives that would have fallen if the war continued. Mirri Maz Duur kills an unborn child on a crime he has not committed. Bloodraven may have honed Euron’s magical abilities on the notion that it would be worth it in the end, and he has a history of working on the basis of “the ends justify the means” during his tenure as Hand (e.g, killing Aenys Blackfyre in a breach of safe conduct, letting the Greyjoys pillage and reave as they please because he was too focused on the Blackfyres, etc). Though there is an obvious variance in the overall morality and sincerity between these character, all of them give the same rationale of a necessary evil done in the name of a greater good. If you have to sacrifice a few to save everyone else, if you have to sacrifice one person to save everyone else, it’s a no brainer, right? What is one life opposite everyone else?

The answer is “everything”

Human lives are worth so much more than being means to an end. Putting people on the chopping block for “the greater good” dehumanizes them by reducing them to sacrificial lambs in the name of a higher purpose. But ASOIAF has always advocated for the recognition of the value of life and respect for the sanctity of human life. Though the methods may vary, the text remains loud and clear in its refusal of dehumanizing ideologies, whether the source is human characters like Tywin Lannister, Robert Baratheon or Randyll Tarly, or supernatural creatures like the Others who are the literal embodiment of dehumanization. ASOIAF is about the fight for our common humanity, for recognizing that humanity regardless of things like class or race or which side of a magical wall you were born on. But you can not fight for our common humanity by devaluing people’s lives. You can not use the argument of “doing it for humanity” to disregard the humanity of those being sacrificed. That cold ruthless pragmatism is not the point of this series; the fight against it is. That’s been the point from the first prologue when Wymar Royce stared the abyss in the face and charged at it.

That’s why the support of the narrative lies with characters like Ned Stark and Davos Seaworth who refuse to give into the idea that the cruelty and dehumanization is necessary for the greater good. Through them, GRRM delivers the point that every single human life matters. That saving one person can mean everything. That it’s not naive to think that one life is worth everything. Protecting the one is not inherently inferior to protecting the many. The greater good can just as well lie in saving one person. Which it did in the case of Ned and Jon.

I think it’s pretty significant that Ned had no idea about the prophecy or what role Jon would play when he protected Jon, while Rhaegar who did know made everything exponentially harder. There’s a rather underappreciated irony in the fact that Rhaegar (and Jaehaerys) had little to do with fulfilling the prophecy; in fact, they jeopardized it. They may have orchestrated the circumstances under which Jon and Dany could be conceived, but a closer look shows that Jon and Dany were born mostly in spite of them and their actions. I mean, Jaehaerys married Rhaella off so young it impacted her health and her ability to bear living children. She almost died at Summerhall along with Rhaegar in an ill-fated attempt to hatch dragons, and while that’s mostly on Aegon V, I expect that Jaehaerys was fully on board as well considering the measures he took for the prophecy. Rhaegar impregnated a teenager and left her to give birth in less than ideal circumstances, and spurred a civil war thing that weakened the realm and put his entire family at risk and got a few of them killed. I can only describe their efforts as counterproductive.

But I find it extremely fitting that they ended up doing little and less for the War for the Dawn, because Rhaegar and Jaehaerys embraced the metaphorical cold in their quest to fight it. Jaehaerys reduced Rhaella to an incubator for a savior as if her humanity and her worth are narrowed down to her womb. Rhaegar was willing to see thousands of people die for his vision of what the prophecy required. They allowed themselves to decide people’s worth. Rhaella, Elia and Lyanna mattered only as much as the children they could bear, and those children mattered only as much as their prophetic roles. Rickard, Brandon, their entourage and the rest of the casualties of the rebellion mattered not at all. But that’s not how it works. Rhaegar and Jaehaerys don’t get to decide people’s worth. They don’t get to decide which lives matter more. They do not get to devalue other people’s lives because these lives are not theirs to decide what to do with. Individual lives matter, not because of a prophetic destiny but because of their humanity.

That’s why I don’t see the prophecy as Rhaegar and Jaehaerys’ absolution, but rather their hubris.I get the sense that they acted on the assumption that the prophecy would make everything alright in the end, especially Rhaegar, and so ended up missing the entire point. They got so entangled in their interpretations of the prophecy that they did everything wrong. Got a lot wrong too since Rhaegar wasn’t even trying to get the Prince that Was Promised from Lyanna; I doubt her was even aiming for a boy. Hatching dragons in Summerhall ended on a tragedy. And of course, no one ever accounted for Tyrion. But the prophecy, true as it may be, doesn’t make things go a certain way; people do.

Which brings me to what you say about how it was destiny that Rhaegar acted like he did instead of other alternatives available to him. This argument fundamentally misunderstands a rather significant theme of this series - that it’s our choices that define who we are. Through the political and magical plots alike, individual choice is held up as immensely important to the point where many characters’ existential victory lies in that choice, the clearest case of all is how the three heads of the dragon have to contend with some version of this dilemma.

It all goes back and back, Tyrion thought, to our mothers and fathers and theirs before them. We are puppets dancing on the strings of those who came before us, and one day our own children will take up our strings and dance on in our steads.

Does Dany have “the taint” of madness? Is Jon’s decision to fight his or is it an inevitability orchestrated by prophecy and Rhaegar Targrayen? Can Tyrion break free of the toxic legacy left behind by Tywin? Do they get to define who they are on their own terms or are they beholden to their lineage and their ancestor’s legacy? That’s for them to decide.

“Yet soon or late in every man’s life comes a day when it is not easy, a day when he must choose.”

Maester Aemon lays down the bare bones of this recurring theme in Jon’s arc. Across multiple books, Jon faces the choice of keeping to his watch or leaving several times which only frames the significance of how his destiny as one of the saviors of Westeros lies in him making that choice. Jon’s “chosen one” status has always been linked to him taking control of his future and deciding for himself. It’s him choosing to stay in Castle Black despite his appalled discovery of the reality of the Watch and to take his vows despite his frustration with the appointment to the stewards. It’s him going with Qhorin Halfhand of his own accord. It’s him picking the Wall over deserting for Robb or Ygritte. It’s him making a conscious decision to be the leader of the fight at the Wall over Stannis’ offer of Winterfell. It’s him taking responsibility of the free folk and recognizing that the commonality of being human is what matters. Jon is on the forefront of the text’s central conflict by virtue of his choices.

Dany is also fighting for our common humanity over in Slaver’s Bay. Her arc is basically a hard fought battle for autonomy, whether hers or the slaves’. Dany fights for freedom, for people’s right to choose, for them to be recognized as people not things to be gifted and sold. “Have you asked them?”, she challenges when Xaro Xohan Daxos argues that slaves have no use for freedom because they were made to be used. But Xaro Xohan Daxos doesn’t get to decide others’ fates, neither do the slavers of Astapor, Yunkai and Meereen. They don’t get to deprive them of their right to choose. People’s lives do not belong to them to decide what to do with. They don’t get to strip them of their free will or dehumanize them by treating them as things to be used to their satisfaction.

Because that’s what the Others are doing. They are supernatural slavers coming with their ice cold chains and stealing every single choice from humanity, right to the choice of dying. You can’t even die. They will resurrect you and force you to be their undead puppet.Mankind can’t even choose death because they will rip death from your grasp and drag your corpse up to join their army. The real threat in this text is a supernatural embodiment of dehumanization and taking away people’s choice. The War for the Dawn is nothing if not a fight for freedom, for the right to choose and to be human.

So the idea of “destiny” controlling how things go? It goes against the very heart of the series. Destiny is nothing but a series of choices deliberately made by individuals to shape the future. There is no fixed inescapable narrative that they can’t deviate from, or some all powerful cosmic power dictating how they should act. Even in the presence of magical visions, it remains the characters’ choices that decide their future. They get the prophecies but what they do with it is on them because the prophecies do not decide who they are. For all the magical elements and prophetic visions in this narrative, it remains that one of the things that the story emphasizes again and again is that our choices matter. They have meaning and they have consequences. Nothing is inevitable unless we make it so.

And that needs to hold true for the story to have any kind of meaning. Acting as if there is some kind of predetermined destiny that compels people to act in a particular way means that literally no one is responsible for their actions. People were just always meant to do what they did. Everyone is bound with chains of magic, lineage and a mystical force that has free reign to manipulate them. Free will is only an illusion fed to pawns that have no control. And if that’s the case, you can no longer hold anyone accountable. How can you call a person good or evil if no one has the capacity to choose their path? How can you hold anyone responsible either for their heroics or their atrocities? And if there is no good and evil, if honor and corruption get tarred by the same brush, if you have no basis to distinguish between the true knights and the false ones, then the only choice is truly “you win or you die”. Which is bullshit. These are false binaries and are far, far from being the measure of triumph.

ASOIAF has never been a story about the futility of ideals but rather about the fight to hold onto those ideals. About how“the battle between good and evil is fought largely within the individual human heart, by the decisions that we make”.  It all comes down to a choice and to the accountability for that choice. This series is rife with people trying to sidestep responsibility for their decisions, from Tywin maintaining plausible deniability to Robert willfully closing his eyes to corruption and transferring blame onto the next convenient target to Roose cultivating “a peaceful land, a quiet people” to Littlefinger keeping “clean hands” to Barristan Selmy and Arys Oakheart hiding behind their vows to justify their inaction in the face of tyranny. But they don’t get to outrun their responsibility for their own decisions. No one gets off scot-free, not because of vows of obedience, not because of corrupt systems, and not because of some notion of an inescapable destiny. The narrative won’t let them.

You must make that choice yourself, and live with it all the rest of your days.

[rametarin]

Ugh, everything you described about critical crab sounds exactly like the worst of r/justneckbeardthings and r/neckbeardtales. Like with anything, I'm sure that entitled assholes and gatekeeping types who don't consider you a real fan if you don't know every obscure factoid of the lore exist, but the onslaught of posts where the smelly, bearded, anime watching weirdo gets epically owned and shamed by the (racial/sexual minority) he was trying to quiz read like fanfics.

And that’s ultimately the point.

In the 80s and 90s, those sorts operated differently. I say it a lot, yeah I know, but.

What they’d do is be friendly. Not because they’re friendly, but because you attract more flies with honey than vinegar. Are they inherently friendly? Less so than the mask they put on. Why wear a mask? Because they want you to think like they do, and flexing how much nicer and more adjusted and good they are helps you perceive them as just being genuine. When in fact, they are being anything but.

They want you to think a certain way, which they deem as correct. They know “well my message has some detractors and it’s not very popular. Maybe because of the wording!” So they aren’t above slowly trying to manipulate you until you’re agreeing with them without even knowing it.

One ritual and method of doing that is to affect your experiences with false anecdotes. Humans form attachment and perception of other groups they haven’t have experiences with personally by the trusted consultations of other human beings. For better or worse. It’s the same mechanism that relies on trust and friendship that most anything else does. They know how these mechanisms work. And they know the Nazis also understood them. Which is how many of them tried to convince their peers that Jews were inherently evil and scheming.

Only, instead of stuff like, “The Jews deliberately spread degeneracy because they don’t have soil!” They instead tell feel good stories about given minorities. This false, saccharine positivity can have no antagonist at all, just problems, or it can have examples of an antagonist majority. Such as, a story about a Karen being an asshole and trying to call the cops to get some harmless neighbor kid off their property.

Now, we both know these are things that happen. Without even having youtube videos, or liveleaks, we know that grumpy old bitches that are racist can and will say ignorant dumb shit. towards black children, whether they’re on their property or not. But without even referencing any explicit instance, these people will take that known experience, that existing information, and utterly fabricate one for the purpose of a story. Effectively, creating a bunch of ballast that is, to your senses, indistinguishable from the real, factual circumstances. So now as far as your judgement is concerned, hearing 5 actual instances of racism and 15 falsified ones are the same. You’re expected to act as if you had 20 glaring examples of actual racism to consider when determining how common it is in your time and community, and trust that what you’re being told is certifiably true. With the threat that they’ll see you as a racist for denying truth, if you don’t. They’ll at least perform you’re just in denial if you try to pick the story apart or ask for citation.

And the purposes of these modern stories is to hammer down the illusion of the smelly, unwashed, misogynistic status quo of the old guard gamer bros. You know, the ones that aren’t on board with this Intersectional Feminist invasion of hobbyist space, where they decided they are now the gatekeepers of the hobby and culture and the old guard are the invaders and unwanteds. While they reinterpret every possible negative experience from the lowest common denominator, cobbling each one into a piece for a collage. Until the perception they hope aspiring girl gamers, writers, artists perceive and take as “just so” is this fedora wearing, neckbearded, maladjusted mental midget that “was bullied for good reason in their teens.”

They’re aggressively trying to reinterpret the culture to new people getting into it and the youth in order to take the influence away from those that were already there, to make the culture what they WANT it to be, rather than what it truly is.

It’s so god damned frustrating, and because of the wider, overarching agenda, the disingenuousness of the conspiracy, and why they do it, they’re organized and networked and deliberately hunt in packs. While pretending there’s no such conspiracy going on.

[tawakkull]

Spirituality in islam: Surur (Rejoicing)

Meaning joy and delight, surur (rejoicing) is a kind of contentment that embraces a person from both within and without. Even though every conscience feels it differently, what is common in the rejoicing felt by everyone of those who rejoice is that breezes of intimacy come from the true Friend at different wavelengths, invading the human inner world.

Lovers of God are made aware of rejoicing with the fragrance of meeting Him, the loyal with the faithfulness in their hearts, and the heroes of nearness to Him with sentiments of certainty. According to their capacity of perception and feeling, each type of person exclaims, In the grace and bounty of God and in His mercy-in this, then, let them rejoice. This is what is best for them, not all (the worldly riches) that they may amass (10:58). When they consider the origin of rejoicing that has arisen in them, they breathe peace and feel exhilaration with the joy of the Divine gifts that come to them.

Belief and all the results it promises, islam (being a Muslim) and all the exalted goals it directs people to, the Qur'an and the fruits with which it is laden pertaining to this and the other worlds, excellence (ihsan) and the vision of God in the hereafter which it promises-each is a mercy and bounty of God given to persons according to their rank, and the joy and contentment that these gifts rouse in their hearts are the flowers of rejoicing that open in the emerald hills of the heart.

Belief, islam, the Qur'an and ihsan (excellence) are the greatest gifts of God and the rejoicing that arises from being honored with them, with its inherent suggestion of gratitude and praise, is the greatest of all favors. Such rejoicing exceeds all worldly joys and pleasures and it is worth sacrificing the world and whatever is in it for its sake. It is because of this excellence that the Qur'an proclaims: This is what is best for them, not all (the worldly riches) that they may amass.

While the Qur'an condemns any joy which does not arise from some Divinely approved thing and it is not certain what it will bring, it praises the rejoicing that comes from the knowledge of God and Divinity, obedience to the Messenger and the fruit of such behavior, and being a Muslim and the fruit of this. In many verses, the Qur'an states:

Let them rejoice (10:58);

Rejoicing in what God has granted them (3:170);

Feeling exhilaration in what is sent down to you (13:36);

For them is the glad tiding (of happiness and triumph) in the present, worldly life and in the hereafter (10:64);

God will give beauty and cheer to their faces and rejoicing in their hearts (76:11), and

They will return to their family in rejoicing (84:9).

While those feeling a joy which does not arise from anything that has been Divinely approved are threatened with an evil end, the others are offered the pleasure of happiness and exhilaration.

According to the source of the rejoicing and the way in which it is felt, rejoicing can be dealt with in three categories:

The first type of rejoicing is that which is embedded in spiritual pleasure. Such rejoicing is a Divine screen against the fear of falling far from the Truth, and of being defeated by the darkness of ignorance of Him, and of the worry of being exposed to loneliness.

The worry of the common believers about remaining distant from the lights of the Truth and breaking away from Him shows itself along with the fear of being unable to surmount the difficulties that surround access to Paradise, and the fear of becoming entangled in the bodily appetites that lead to Hell. The fear that the distinguished ones among believers feel about being exposed to loneliness is accompanied by the fear that one may feel no desire for the good, Divinely approved things, and no aversion to sins or immoral behavior. As for those foremost in nearness to God, they fear and worry that their feelings about separation and isolation are accompanied by a hesitation or slowness in choosing between remaining in this world and going to the hereafter. All of these things cause everybody grief and anxiety to varying degrees. The rejoicing that appears on the horizon of the heart when its arguments have gained precedence becomes a means of exhilaration against this grief.

Whether it is caused by a lack of knowledge of God or is the basis of wrong behavior and rebellion, ignorance causes grief and anxiety to the spirit. To prevent this, the absolute Friend removes the darkness of heresy, misguidance, and denial that sometimes infiltrates into the spirit, with the breezes of rejoicing which He causes to blow in the breasts and illuminate the hearts of His friends with His own Light, making them sources of light as indicated in the Verse of Light (24:35). We can interpret this as the Almighty’s bringing forth those whom He loves into light from the darkness, reviving their hearts with the light of His Knowledge, and making them candidates for eternity. The lightdiffusing Divine declarations in the Qur'an point to certain dimensions of this Divine favor. For example:

(2:257) God is the Owner and Confidant of the believers, bringing them forth from the darkness (of unbelief, heresy, and misguidance) into the light (of belief, islam, and perfect goodness); and

(6:122) Is, then, he who was dead (in spirit), and We raised him to life, and set for him a light by which he moves among people without any deviation-is he like the one who is lost in depths of darkness, out of which he cannot emerge?

When the spirit falls far off from the pure spiritual realm, which is the true source of the Divine gifts that flow into it, it becomes wretched, feels lonely and isolated, and is dragged towards other paths with different expectations and feels discontent. Yet, as declared in the verse (13:28), Know well that in the remembrance and mention of God do hearts find rest and contentment, a heart which is fed on remembrance and the mention of God can overcome all adversities with the pleasure it has in the rejoicing that God has caused to arise in it.

The second type of rejoicing is that which comes from witnessing God in everything with all His Names and Attributes. Seekers who progress from knowledge to knowledge of God wholly submit their bodily life and free will to the Divine Will by virtue of their obedience, devotion and spiritual connection to God, and their relation with Him from the bottom of their hearts. They rise to a new life by the Lord’s will; the result of this is that rejoicing appears and the spiritual dimension of their spiritual existence that looks to the other world gains predominance. Even though they fulfil what they should do to obtain a result, their belief in, submission to and reliance on God are a much more powerful resource in their decisions and actions, and they feel events with their peculiarities at wavelengths that belong to the realms beyond. This may be viewed as selfannihilation in God. The author of al-Minhajpictures the deep rejoicing that arises from such rejoicing as follows:

A state which proceeds from knowledge of the Unseen;

It is not possible to perceive that knowledge except through pleasure.

Always make efforts so that you can be freed from your own self,

(For acquiring this knowledge is only possible by becoming free from one’s own self.)

It is incumbent on you to acquire it, if you can pay its price.

Knowledge of the outer dimension of existence is mixed with clay and muddy water,

While knowledge of its inner dimension (nourished with Divine gifts) guides the soul and heart.

(Spiritual) knowledge is a hidden treasure which comes to you,

In proportion to how much you can be freed from your own self.

The rejoicing that arises from acceptance of the heavenly realm, which is the third type of rejoicing, removes the feeling of loneliness and isolation from every part of the spirit. It prompts travelers to the Truth to witness the Divine Being in His signs and causes them to overflow with the hope of knocking on the door that witnesses the manifestation of His Names and Attributes, and in the hope that their spirit will drown in the joys that pertain to the other world.

At this level of rejoicing, the heart, the spirit, and the other faculties, all turn to the One Who eternally speaks, with a most sincere desire and-as indicated in the saying, If He did not want to give, He would not have given the desire to ask-they are honored with acceptance by the One Who answers and bestows freely. Seekers who rise to this level are enraptured with the streams of rejoicing in their spirits and begin to feel the breezes of His intimacy blowing from the Realm of the Holy Presence. They feel as if at the threshold of the pure spiritual realm of Divine Mercy and become aware of the pure realm of the Divine Dominion with an overflowing desire and excited readiness to knock on the door that witnesses Him in His signs and the manifestations of His Being. It is as if they have been turned into pure spirits, becoming quite intoxicated with what they see and hear beyond all concepts of modality, and smiling at all those favors by the Grace of God.

O God! Include us among those whose faces are bright (with the vision of You), and who are looking towards Your Holy Face.

May God’s peace and blessings be upon Muhammad, upon him be the most perfect of blessings and salutations, on his brothers among the Prophets and Messengers, and on all the members of his family.

[bbq-hawks-wings]

Series Review Pt. 3/3

Part One

Part Two

All right, last one!

One of the things about adults is that most become increasingly less flexible the older they get. They learn to function in a certain way to get certain results and work themselves into a pattern that inhibits their ability to be creative or dynamic which is compounded the less they are challenged. This isn’t opinion - this has been a scientifically and statistically verified fact. Different levels of physical and emotional development fundamentally changes the way human beings process stimuli and conflict, and factors like physical injuries and trauma affect the ability of one to process and resolve stressful situations. This doesn’t mean adults can’t change the way they think or do things, but it’s much harder for them to mentally and emotionally break out of their preconceived notions unprompted whereas younger adults still largely maintain the ability to criticize and adjust changes in perspective and creatively adapt to new information.

The kids we see in HeroAca are in a particularly unique situation in regards to coming from a background of ideals (“If I work hard, I’ll see the fruits of my labor”) and coming to grips with the inherently unfair nature of the world (“Even the greatest hero can’t save everyone”). Combined with the early exposure they’ve had to the injustices in their society and their general disposition to maximize the positive impact they have on others the “next generation of heroes” is in a unique situation to completely overhaul the current system literally as they enter it by bringing in new ideals and embracing their diversity in thought and background to directly challenge failings in the old system as well as bring awareness to those who exist outside it. With an added sense of camaraderie and teamwork over rivalry they have the ability to foster more “human” conversations with the aim of improving the world as opposed to being purely focused on “business” when in uniform the way their predecessors were.

This isn’t to say that the grown heroes of the series have to be completely done away with, just that they have not had a generation so able to challenge them to action in the way their juniors do now. In fact, it’s a running theme in the series that the next generation of heroes either teach or save their mentors in unexpected ways and with varying degrees of intensity as they work through adversity together.

Red Riot has not only saved Fatgum in a literal sense in the battle with the Shie Hassaikai, but Fatgum explicitly states he underestimated the ability and resolve of the young hero. He also holds faith in his older mentee, Sun Eater, whom he regards as a hero unrivaled in ability in the current climate if he only could overcome his own self-doubt. Sir Nighteye’s confidence in Lemillion is evident from the start and to his dying breath believes the key to his ability to save is not rooted in the strength of his quirk but by his ability to make others smile. Nighteye’s previous disdain of Deku is eventually turned into awe and inspiration when he’s able to do what was previously thought to be impossible and theoretically change destiny itself. All Might’s faith in Deku has also been immediately obvious, but seeing that his symbolic value with the next generation as a hero hasn’t depreciated with his declining ability has given him the resolve to fight for his own survival again. Bakugo in particular has received a new, special place in his heart as a capable hero who together with Deku represents his two separate but related core values in a hero - winning and saving - but with greater potential then All Might was able to achieve alone. Shinsou has served as a personal means for Eraserhead to move past the trauma of violently losing his childhood friend and begin to truly encourage the next generation to accept the risk inherent in this line of work instead of letting his fears inhibit his ability to teach and mentor them. Shouto has been a catalyst for Endeavor to seek to restore to his family what he took away from them and to recognize that he can never fully restore or erase the trauma he inflicted on them nor does he have any right to ask to be included in their lives any further. Even straightforward, straight-laced Tsukoyomi has inspired Hawks to take a second look at what it means to raise up the next generation of heroes outside of his own troubled past with it to the point he now actively encourages and genuinely believes in them as a whole to possess the power to make changes he couldn't.

These conversations have largely not happened with the criminal side of the field as any opportunity for the children to touch the hearts of villains have been marred by the inherent life-or-death struggle of each encounter. Each side is literally too busy fighting for survival/victory to truly have some of these meaningful conversations, but the seeds they’ve planted in the hearts of their mentors as well as the rare heart-to-heart interactions they’ve had with villains have proven they have power; and that’s going to be the deciding factor in this literal war at the end of the manga - that is, this missing piece is going to be an opportunity for the heroes to save the hearts of the villains.

The key to this next generation “saving” an army of villains will be dependent on their ability to advocate for rehabilitation and reintegration into society - both for villains to accept the help and for broader society being willing to forgive them. Hawks has already started with his personal offer to help Twice, but it will be interesting to see how others are able to input offers for reform in the heat of battle and in light of their individual circumstances.

An example I hope we’ll get to see is an interaction between Dabi, Endeavor, and Shouto (assuming, of course, that Dabi is a Todoroki). Shouto would be the main deciding factor in the altercation as he has undergone the same kind of abuse and personal tragedy at the hand of Endeavor as Dabi has; but the outcome was completely different and he therefore may be able to speak to Dabi in a way that Endeavor definitely cannot. Shouto made the personal choice to not let his hatred for his father consume him and instead channeled the resources available to him to become a hero capable of saving others because he determined in and of himself to do so, rather than becoming a person obsessed with personal vengeance or merely operating as his father’s vicarious victory. It’s important to remember that Shouto has looked to the ideals of heroism (mainly through his admiration of All Might) as a good thing from a young age, but those ideals were overshadowed in the face of the constant abuse in his home and he became more and more cynical over time. As he began to accept that he was not bound by the burden of his upbringing and was capable of moving past the trauma to determine his own future despite it, he was not only able to change his entire outlook on his future for his own sake; but Shouto even began to cause Endeavor to reexamine the ethics and consequences of his actions even without the forgiveness of his family simply by operating as the kind of hero Shouto wanted to be for himself instead of the hero Endeavor tried to force upon him. 

In this light, Dabi’s personal vendetta is clarified to not be the pursuit of justice but a mere act of vengeance with understandable motivation but ultimately evil justification that has not only failed to constructively address the issue of neglect and abuse in his own home, let alone of hero families as a whole, but has caused undeserved collateral death and grief in the process. Whether this revelation will “save” Dabi is unknown as Shouto and Natsuo also still hold deep contempt for their father; but both of them have begun to move past the events of their childhood (if only in very small steps) and have begun to self-determine their relationship with their father individually, while Dabi is still operating out of pure spite. Interestingly, what we may end up seeing in this situation is a schism resulting in a fight similar to the final showdown between Zuko and Azula in Avatar: the Last Airbender. (And on that note, I don’t know how I didn’t notice the additional parallels between the families sooner between the scar, paternal abuse resulting in an estranged mother, and sibling with blue fire. I called Todoroki Frosty Fire Prince Zuko in the past as a joke, but this feels so obvious now; I’ve clearly been sleeping.) One more wild card thrown in will be if Hawks is present for this interaction and seeing his reaction to it as he will fight Dabi and has a similar story to both him and Shouto.

Where kids like Bakugo and Deku will be most relevant or impactful is not quite clear at the moment, though a clash with Shigaraki feels imminent. We do know at least that each are counted as capable heroes in their own rights with the distinction that Bakugo is a hero who wins fights and Deku is a hero who saves people so their role might look like something along the lines of Bakugo ending a battle and Deku ending the underlying conflict. There seems to be an insinuation that these two things rarely can be done at the same time, and that first the physical threat must be addressed before a sit-down and exchange can be made to talk about the motivations and underlying causes of the fight. Much like with the final fight with Overhaul, Eri was not considered to be completely saved until after she was removed from her situation and then allowed to heal - and even that process is ongoing.

If the heroes are able to refute the viewpoints of the villains at the end of the day and are able to truly move the public on their behalf, those who chose to cooperate will likely be given the chance to start over while those who continue to fight out of spite will be at best detained and at worst killed in the struggle. What this might look like, I’m not sure, as some have hefty crimes to answer for and may not have the opportunity to truly reintegrate. Any country/society/culture with as many people committing as severe crimes as these would have difficulty embracing change that would welcome these people back, let alone the specific context of Japan that brutally punishes criminals and so often permanently damages their reputations and social standing - sometimes for what many would consider only “minor” crimes. Nevertheless, it doesn’t mean that there isn’t hope for even the worst of them with a proper change of heart; and the fact that the Meta Liberation Army was as widespread a cultural phenomena as it was offers the idea that enough people are open to the ideas of the radical shifts necessary to address these concerns which increases the chance to make reforms peacefully.

As a focus point, consider Shigaraki. He’s the most important villain to reach not only as the head of this massive villain organization but as a dire victim of the current system’s shortcomings. His own biggest quarrel with hero society as it stands is that it makes people overconfident and apathetic because there's always a hero just around the corner - let them handle this person in need. While Shigaraki is not advocating for individual moral responsibility, a new societal emphasis on it could resolve most of the issues he has with hero society. A big enough cultural shift could also address instances of criminal activity on a case by case basis - a new focus that hurt people lashing out isn't acceptable behavior, but perhaps some other response than immediate punishment should be considered; as well as reconsider the role of the current justice system in the progressive intensity over a person’s criminal history to mitigate these problems before they manifest.

Right now what's holding up Shigaraki's power over others (outside of the terror he inspires) is the support of others predicated on a lie - and this goes both for the League and the PLF. If that lie is exposed, Shigaraki could wind up high, dry, and unsupported - vulnerable - depending on how individuals take the revelation. He does seem to genuinely care for the core members of the League, and their loyalty to him is undeniably profound and far reaching. Despite his nihilism, at the end of the day he’s still a deeply wounded and angry individual looking in extremes for some solace in the injustice of a world that rejected him. There are many ways this can go depending on who faces who in the final showdowns to come; but for that we'll have to wait and see.

If someone as far gone as Shigaraki can be saved then there's a bright future out there for everyone if they are willing to reach out together and grab it.

This review has left out many aspects of the story I reviewed as important but not necessary for this article, and at some 5k words that's probably for the best. Too much speculation at the moment doesn't feel very productive outside of how general themes and plotlines will tie up at the end, but I'll have to save some of those specifics for some other time. Thank you for sticking out with me this far, and thank you again to @baezetsu​ and @dorito9708​ for helping me review and edit all this information!