#why would you doubt that?

[greatwyrmgold]

In case anyone doubted Kazuki was an "I'm going to get a good grade in dad (something that is both normal to want and possible to achieve)" kind of parent, well...

[greatwyrmgold]

#i think i've avoided anything too spoilery but read more at your own risk

#also it's the only way to respond to stuff in the tags if you want folks who didn't see the original post to know what you're talking about

#what's that tag i kept seeing?

#so i just kinda wing it when this comes up

#why would you doubt that?

#oh hey how did that tag get in there

#i wonder what qa would have looked like in shardspace

#but i'd like to think it's a spitball that anya's clueless about because it's the new moon and she blinked

#or that it never comes back and i get to keep imagining what better rwby it could have become

Which is weird, because most of these are tags I've used once and there are other tags I've used repeatedly which involve the words in question.

To all the Tumblr users who tend to use tags very liberally:

Let’s play a game.

Type the following words into your tags box, then post the first automatic tag that comes up.

you

also

what

when

why

how

look

because

never

[butchfalin]

the funniest meltdown ive ever had was in college when i got so overstimulated that i could Not speak, including over text. one of my friends was trying to talk me through it but i was solely using emojis because they were easier than trying to come up with words so he started using primarily emojis as well just to make things feel balanced. this was not the Most effective strategy... until. he tried to ask me "you okay?" but the way he chose to do that was by sending "👉🏼👌🏼❓" and i was so shocked by suddenly being asked if i was dtf that i was like WHAT???? WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY TO ME?????????? and thus was verbal again

[g0refre4k]

Did you really mean it when you said you loved me …?

- 🪓

Of course I did.

[giantkillerjack]

Today my therapist introduced me to a concept surrounding disability that she called "hLep".

[plain-text version of this post can be found under the cut]

Which is when you - in this case, you are a disabled person - ask someone for help ("I can't drink almond milk so can you get me some whole milk?", or "Please call Donna and ask her to pick up the car for me."), and they say yes, and then they do something that is not what you asked for but is what they think you should have asked for ("I know you said you wanted whole, but I got you skim milk because it's better for you!", "I didn't want to ruin Donna's day by asking her that, so I spent your money on an expensive towing service!") And then if you get annoyed at them for ignoring what you actually asked for - and often it has already happened repeatedly - they get angry because they "were just helping you! You should be grateful!!"

And my therapist pointed out that this is not "help", it's "hLep".

Sure, it looks like help; it kind of sounds like help too; and if it was adjusted just a little bit, it could be help. But it's not help. It's hLep.

At its best, it is patronizing and makes a person feel unvalued and un-listened-to. Always, it reinforces the false idea that disabled people can't be trusted with our own care. And at its worst, it results in disabled people losing our freedom and control over our lives, and also being unable to actually access what we need to survive.

So please, when a disabled person asks you for help on something, don't be a hLeper, be a helper! In other words: they know better than you what they need, and the best way you can honor the trust they've put in you is to believe that!

Also, I want to be very clear that the "getting angry at a disabled person's attempts to point out harmful behavior" part of this makes the whole thing WAY worse. Like it'd be one thing if my roommate bought me some passive-aggressive skim milk, but then they heard what I had to say, and they apologized and did better in the future - our relationship could bounce back from that. But it is very much another thing to have a crying shouting match with someone who is furious at you for saying something they did was ableist. Like, Christ, Jessica, remind me to never ask for your support ever again! You make me feel like if I asked you to call 911, you'd order a pizza because you know I'll feel better once I eat something!!

Edit: crediting my therapist by name with her permission - this term was coined by Nahime Aguirre Mtanous!

Edit again: I made an optional follow-up to this post after seeing the responses. Might help somebody. CW for me frankly talking about how dangerous hLep really is.

Plain-text version:

Today my therapist introduced me to a concept surrounding disability that she called "hLep".

Which is when you - in this case, you are a disabled person - ask someone for help ("I can't drink almond milk so can you get me some whole milk?", or "Please call Donna and ask her to pick up the car for me."), and they say yes, and then they do something that is not what you asked for but is what they think you should have asked for ("I know you said you wanted whole, but I got you skim milk because it's better for you!", "I didn't want to ruin Donna's day by asking her that, so I spent your money on an expensive towing service!") And then if you get annoyed at them for ignoring what you actually asked for - and often it has already happened repeatedly - they get angry because they "were just helping you! You should be grateful!!"

And my therapist pointed out that this is not "help", it's "hLep".

Sure, it looks like help; it kind of sounds like help too; and if it was adjusted just a little bit, it could be help. But it's not help. It's hLep.

At its best, it is patronizing and makes a person feel unvalued and un-listened-to. Always, it reinforces the false idea that disabled people can't be trusted with our own care. And at its worst, it results in disabled people losing our freedom and control over our lives, and also being unable to actually access what we need to survive.

So please, when a disabled person asks you for help on something, don't be a hLeper, be a helper! In other words: they know better than you what they need, and the best way you can honor the trust they've put in you is to believe that!

P.S. Also, I want to be very clear that the "getting angry at a disabled person's attempts to point out harmful behavior" part of this makes the whole thing WAY worse. Like it'd be one thing if my roommate bought me some passive-aggressive skim milk, but then they heard what I had to say, and they apologized and did better in the future - our relationship could bounce back from that. But it is very much another thing to have a crying shouting match with someone who is furious at you for saying something they did was ableist. Like, Christ, Jessica, remind me to never ask for your support ever again! You make me feel like if I asked you to call 911, you'd order a pizza because you know I'll feel better once I eat something!!

Edit: crediting my therapist by name with her permission - this term was coined by Nahime Aguirre Mtanous!

Edit again: I made an optional follow-up to this post after seeing the responses. Might help somebody. CW for me frankly talking about how dangerous hLep really is.

[nohr-selphias]

"I love you, Zevran. I hope you know that."

"Yes... Yes, I know that."

— commission art by @sinizade, posted with permission

[14dayswithyou]

Olivia fell asleep in one of the aisles again...

how do you feel about ren being used in an ai chatbot advertisement?

⌞♥⌝ Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I genuinely despise everything about this so much, and if anyone comes across this ad on TikTok (or anywhere else), I'd really appreciate it if you could report the video and not give it any further engagement.

I'm vehemently against the use of AI that negatively impacts artists, writers/authors, developers, creators, etc., and I don't condone the use of my art and IP without my knowledge and explicit consent — especially when it's being used in a paid ad/sponsorship. It's extremely disrespectful and I have no respect for those who do it.

[hellspawnmotel]

epsilons

[clockworkreapers]

Vol 3 Jack really went though it huh

[mxtxfanatic]

One day this fandom will have a reckoning on how it likes to blame Jin Xixuan's death on Wei Wuxian—whether by maliciousness or a "loss of control"—while ignoring the fact that Jin Zixuan died because he lunged at Wei Wuxian with a drawn sword because he was angry that Wei Wuxian told him that he doesn't trust him after he refused to tell Wei Wuxian whether or not he was a part of the ambush his cousin set up after Wei Wuxian told him to keep his distance from him after he told Wei Wuxian to stop defending himself against an ambush that he showed up to and was plainly told was put together to kill Wei Wuxian after he had already been bodily pushing Wei Wuxian around to protect his cousin. But all of that is supposed to be forgiven and forgotten because the reason he wanted Wei Wuxian to ignore all logic and put his life in danger was for Jiang Yanli's temporary happiness? Lol. Lmao even.

[turtleblogatlast]

Every day I’m haunted by the fact the boys happily swim in sewer water

Even if it’s filtered somehow there’s no way it’s not still nasty 😭 Bet they can defeat any of their villains just by accidentally giving them diseases I swear

[trappedinafantasy37]

POV: Evil murder kitten tries to evil murder you in your sleep. She's desperate for a reason not to evil murder you because she does not want to.

[edwinisms]

i get such a sense of primal envy when looking at edwin’s clothes up close because god you can just tell his coat is real wool and made to last and not cheap flimsy mass produced garbage and auggagghhhh that was just STANDARD in his time. by no means am i saying i was #borninthewronggeneration because i like having vaccines and household appliances but. man. to have a personally-tailored coat like that that’d last for years and years……. and fabrics of fine thread-dense quality………. if only

[triflesandparsnips]

Accidentally started rereading Northanger Abbey, and was sudden reminded all over again that Jane Austen is, in fact, fucking hilarious.

NA is her parody/satire of Gothic novels at the time, and she starts the book by choosing violence-- she describes the "tragedy" of the main character, Catherine Morland, a girl Determined to be a Heroine even though ALL ODDS are against her: she has a sane father who doesn't lock up his daughters, a healthy mother who didn't die in childbirth, no preternatural talent for music or drawing through which to reveal her Deepest Soul, and-- most shockingly of all-- absolutely zero love interests for whom she can wander the hills mourning their starcrossed fates until she wastes away from the sheer Sentimentality of it all.

But don't worry! She's got this FIGURED OUT. She KNOWS why she has not yet found her TRUE LOVE:

There was not one lord in the neighbourhood; no—not even a baronet. There was not one family among their acquaintance who had reared and supported a boy accidentally found at their door—not one young man whose origin was unknown. Her father had no ward, and the squire of the parish no children.

But when a young lady is to be a heroine, the perverseness of forty surrounding families cannot prevent her. Something must and will happen to throw a hero in her way.

(SPOILER: She is introduced to a mysterious young man who lives in an ABBEY, which everyone knows means he has a DEEPLY MYSTERIOUS SECRET PAST and is maybe a TRAGIC HERO or even a ROMANTIC MONSTER and either way this is IT this is Catherine's TIME TO SHINE she is going to get a good grade in DOOMED LOVE, a thing that is normal to want and--)

(...meanwhile Henry Tilney-- an ordinary guy who never expected "get cast as the Hero in some Grand Gothic Romance" to show up on his bingo card-- starts wondering when exactly he started finding Catherine's attempts to locate bloody daggers in his linen closet charming.)

[xinganhao]

who in svt would do this (in your opinion) HAHAHAHAH

https://x.com/dominokais/status/1881529484605792347?s=46&t=oxxXjiyy0RbERrf077vGJg

easily cheol, jun, seokmin, or seungkwan 🙂‍↕️

[l-in-the-light]

Trafalgar Law: fear of closeness and touch part 2, the extended edition

Writing another post about it, because I have a lot of thoughts I need to organize for myself. This time it will be more like my interpretation about Law and his relationships with people than about the touch itself. And also I forgot one of the most crucial scenes about the topic (because ofc I would forget something so important), so I will start with it:

The last touch he remembers from Flevance is hiding under the pile of corpses, cold dehumanized bodies, treated like trash. No one wanted to touch them, just like no one wanted to be touched by Law. How poetic that Law escaped Flevance with a death sentence while hiding among the dead, because he will be treated like he's dead to the world from now on.

This reminds me of a manga I once read, Shigeshoushi (The Embalmer). It's about a guy whose job is embalming the dead, and he is ostracized, feared and refused by people as a result. Contact with death and dead bodies is taboo in Shinto and folk culture of Japan in general. If you think it's a thing of the past, I reccommend to watch Okuribito (Departures), it's really good and this topic is at the heart of the movie.

Anyway, back to the manga, warning for spoilers. Situation escalates to the point when the only human touch the guy can get is that of him handling the corpses for his job and that really messes up with his mental health. His despair leads him to engage himself in risky situations just to get by, casual sexual encounters with strangers become the only form of intimacy he can get and he soon gets addicted to it, but it still lacks the emotional warmth and love he desperately craves, so it's never enough for him. Of course to even get those encounters he has to lie about his job and whenever his lie gets exposed and he is confronted about it, forced to listen to all those women blaming him, feeling disgusted by what he forced on them (it was never forced, but suddenly it's unwanted after they learn he embalms dead bodies every day), and it just triggers and deepens his trauma.

I wonder if you can tell where I'm going with this comparison. Law is definitely as starved for touch and love as the main protagonist is. Still, I don't believe Law would become hypersexual (tho that's just my personal impression, especially after he so blatantly refused Monett), but most importantly unlike the main character Law would definitely not desperately beg for the touch. It's just not how Law is, he doesn't like to impose himself on others if he absolutely doesn't have to. Not to mention he can't bear asking openly for help or for anything really, not after the Vergo incident. It was the last time he ever begged for something.

Law seems to be the type to neglect his own needs to the point that he makes stupid and reckless decisions based on his fear of losing people (callback to Wano and imprisoned Hearts). When people dear to him are in danger, his first instinct is to rush and help them unless he's completely immobilized. That's the level of "prioritizing other people's safety and needs" he believes in, he would do it every time, but he hates when people do it for him. Mostly because he deeply believes Corazon got hurt because of him, and Corazon gave him all that love Law was starving for. And Law believes Cora-san finally died for it.

Add his trauma of expecting people to not want to be touched by him into the equation. That's why he has problems expressing his own need for love (and touch) from that point onward. He acts so tough, doesn't allow himself to show weakness and will definitely never ask for love, he learned his lesson on that.

But what about Heart Pirates? They love him! He clearly protects and deeply cares for them, but in each scene he is with them, not counting Bepo, he keeps them at a distance. I do believe Law treats his crew more or less on equal terms, he favours freedom after all, but their relationship is restricted by his fear and makes it significantly more asymmetrical than the one Luffy has with his crew. I do think Penguin and Shachi are more important to Law than the rest of his crew, they're best friends, they've formed the Heart Pirates together, but he doesn't allow them to be on touchy feely basis with him. That's reserved for Bepo. Bepo is basically the last safe haven Law allowed himself to have up until Strawhats happened.

Law at Sabaody creates three new bonds with people: with two supernovas and Jean Bart. The latter he takes into his crew and I believe it's because Jean Bart has no other place to go, especially with Marines and Pacifistas running around the island. It's possible Law does it all the time and his crew (beyond the original four) got expanded because of that.

Law's bond with Kid started on a wrong foot, not only Kid judges Law based on prejudice and "bad rep" flying around about him, he also accussed him of lack of manners (triggering a flashback to Vergo), all in Law's hearing range. It's not really surprising later on Law doesn't want to owe Kid a favour by letting Kid take care of the Marines. Law clearly doesn't want to be indebted to someone who feels disgust towards him (I don't think Kid is disgusted by him, but that's what Law thinks at this point). And even after Wano it seems Law made sure that they're even, none is indebted to the other. For Law it was just a temporary alliance, he kept his distance, they didn't end up becoming friends.

Last new bond Law created was with Luffy. It started indirectly at first, Luffy was defending his fishman friend. Things said about Hatchan triggered a trauma response in Law ("Don't come closer! Disgusting! He will spread diseases!"), in my headcanon freezing him in the spot. But Luffy defended his friend and indirectly also Law by punching the Celestial Dragon, in similar fashion to Corazon defending Law by punching the doctors spouting similar prejudice about amber lead syndrome.

Law thanked Luffy for that and he felt safe doing so, after all what Luffy did was never directed at Law himself, but the gratitude must have confused Luffy to no end (Why is that guy thanking me? I didn't do anything for him!). Law didn't mind this bond at this moment exactly because it was so indirect, as a result he allowed himself to interact with Luffy and even took the first step, probably thinking it will lead to nothing. But he would never do it if not for Luffy's indirect impact on Law. If that's the expected level for casual bonds Law has set up, I doubt many occassions appeared for that before. It just shows he avoids people as a general rule, period.

But things changed after they left the auction house. Law is displeased with Kid, only telling him not to order him around and refusing to even talk with him, but his dynamic with Luffy is completely different, he doesn't feel bad about it despite being treated like accomplice in the whole Celestial Dragon incident.

He even allows himself to tease him a bit. There's no bad air between them. It almost feels like Law feels more emotionally available despite them being strangers, or rather exactly because they're strangers here and Law thinks they will also leave as strangers, which gives him the freedom to be more open.

They fought together, mostly by accident, but for Luffy that's enough to already feel a bit attached to Kid and Law. He declares he's after One Piece, implying from now on they will be rivals.

That doesn't earn him any response from Law. In fact, he just smirks and retreats without a word.

There are multiple possible reasons for his reaction here, but one of them is important right now: if Law said anything, he would acknowledge that bond, that of being a rival to Luffy. He didn't want it, in fact he wanted them to remain strangers, with no lingering attachments. That's why, when he got offered Luffy's friendship (disguised as rivalship, mind you), he turns back and retreats.

That's his answer. Later in Amazon Lily he also ends up retreating without even waiting for Luffy to say his thanks.

And how ironic that the next time they see each other it's Law who ends up extending his hand, not once, but twice: first by saving Luffy's life by risking his own, and second time by proposing alliance. I can only imagine Luffy's surprise: he got rejected before, but now it's Law himself proposing it! And what a funny guy he is, he doesn't need to offer friendship, because for Luffy they're already friends, after all didn't Law save his life? Law though just needed help, but wouldn't ask for it directly, because we know he never does that anymore, so instead he offered a bait. Frankly he didn't need to, Luffy would do anything he wanted him to anyway. Luffy ofc thought the alliance is a fun idea, but in the end he accepted it because it's Law who needed it to be an alliance, he wouldn't accept help otherwise. Also alliance felt impersonal and safe, without the need to be emotionally open.

There's so many seperate frames of Law just staring and thinking upon their reunion. He's conflicted. Also at this point their relationship changed, whether Law wanted it or not. He was there when Luffy lost Ace, saw him breaking down, definitely thought they now share something in common: they both lost people who were the dearest to them. I'm also sure he could see through Luffy's smile, he knew there's no way he would be already "okay" after just two years.

Unusual whimsical frame of Luffy. He closed his eyes, not listening to the words spoken, but instead listening to his own heart. He knows he needs to kidnap Caesar, that's what Law asked him to do, but Luffy doesn't just want to do what he's told, he wants to make sure the person he is doing it for is happy. It's a callback to Luffy's deepest regret: leaving Sabo with his family, assuming things would be better this way, without making sure first if that's something that would make Sabo actually happy.

Ever since Luffy does this double-check-for-no-regrets for all of his friends and crewmates. He follows Nami to Arlong Park and waits patiently in case she actually needs help. She questions Kyros' choice and goes to all the way to Rebecca to the castle just to ask her if she's really fine with staying seperated from her dad. And he does it here as well. Would kidnapping Caesar make Law actually happy, Luffy wonders. And probably thinks back to their previous encounter, in Sabaody, and Law's mysterious line after Luffy punched the Celestial Dragon: "Thanks Strawhat, you showed me something interesting". And Luffy found his answer and it's this:

Punching Caesar. Apparently Luffy did something right in Sabaody and he thinks it was about the punching, so he does it again now as well. Ofc he wants to punch Caesar anyway, but he does pause before doing that, he actually doesn't jump for it straightaway, it's AFTER he thinks about it. Luffy decided this is what would make Law actually happy, despite going against the plan. Luffy didn't believe following Law's plan will actually make Law happy, but punching his enemies will.

And yet Law doesn't look happy, but let's look more closely to his body languague. He turns around, doesn't declare his unhappiness directly to Luffy's face, he's making an emotional retreat again despite shouting. He's giving mixed signals. So was Luffy wrong?

Law is trying to hide his smile. Making sure no one notices. He's trying to maintain the distance and remain cold, but seems it's working less and less efficiently.

I will let you decide it for yourselves whether Luffy was right or wrong in the end.

There is more nuance about this I didn't even touch yet, for example the drastic gap between Marines fearing Law and calling him a monster, and Stawhats (minus Luffy), at first fearful and suspicious of Law, but it took them like 5 minutes to change their mind and trust him just like Luffy did.

In Dressrosa Law declares that, deep in his heart, he actually also wants to kick Doflamingo's butt. Luffy doesn't even act surprised upon hearing that. Of course, he knew already, Law didn't even have to say it.

While in Dressrosa Law attempts to break the alliance, send off half the Strawhats to safety and despite barely being able to move himself he takes care of Luffy in the final countdown. Almost like he already treats them like his own crew, keeping them safe. If you ask me, someone got attached. And the pinnacle of it is when Law shares with us that he aims to either live or die with Luffy (not die for him, unlike Luffy's own crew declaring in this arc). That's the best he could offer and he knows how much it's painful when someone dies *for you*, he wouldn't inflict that pain on Luffy again, not when he knows Luffy thinks of him as a friend.

And finally in Wano Law finally opens up more and lashes out at Strawhats, just like he did at Corazon. He no longer feels the need to emotionally distance himself all the time, or keeping it all bottled up behind a stoic cold facade and impersonal "alliance". That's how he shows his worry and affection, he considers them his responsibility in Wano.

He also admits for the very first time his fear of losing people. "The plan isn't worth anyone dying" (in this case - Zoro dying). He allows himself to trust and to be vulnerable.

If you think Law is torn about his growing connection with Strawhats, then you're thinking the same as me. He allowed himself to get attached and he didn't want to initially.

Is it really alright if I touch you too…? (ready to retreat his hand at any moment he senses it's unwanted after all)

His words are often rough and cold, but his actions speak for themselves. He trusts the Strawhats by this point, they're his second crew, and he would do the same for them he would do for his Hearts.

And now he has a problem, he gained more people he is afraid of losing. New friends.