#you can't defend a point or get mad at people based only on your personal headcanons and shit pulled out of your ass

[willandmichael]

stranger things fandom consider the show canon please please please please

[hotchfiles]

❝ ['CUZ YOU'RE A NATURAL] ❞ — a in this house of mine prequel ; MDNI!

pairing: aaron hotchner x rossi!reader. summary: not having a crush on your dad's friend and co-worker should be rule number one. but what are rules when said friend is aaron hotchner? content warnings: this is suggestive at best. foul language? still let's go with MDNI! age-gap flirting. word count: 1k. a/n: might do a pt.2, i just needed to get this out of my brain.

He’s just pretending not to notice it at this point, which isn’t easy coming from a person who notices everything. Coming from the man who helped build the unit that literally analyzes people for a living. 

Granted he wasn’t the most present of fathers and he wasn’t even sure if your mother was his second or third ex-wife anymore, but he knew human behavior, and human behavior clearly showed there was no reason for you to be there, “Kid, I’m sure you hate sports of any kind.” David comments, observing as you make sure Jack’s shoes are tight and won’t get in his way. 

“Well dear father, actually, I was a cheerleader for my last three high school years. And the first two college ones.” He knows that, and you know he knows it, but your best way out of the mess you were purposefully getting into right now was to appeal to the guilt you knew he still had from not being around much. “Base of the pyramid, very important, sporty, love sports.” You noticed you were going on for too long and shut your yapper.

Lucky for you Aaron didn’t seem to mind the two of you discussing, busy watching his baby boy with the most sweetest look on his face, he looks ethereal, his smile the most enchanting you’ve ever seen. 

You can feel your father’s glance going from you to Aaron slowly, he’s observing, analyzing but trying hard to ignore the signs. The signs that you weren’t there for some dad and daughter bonding.

Unless the dad in question was Hotchner.

The sole reason you had put yourself in short rounded skirt, sports short underneath, gym sneakers and shirt, and an old baseball cap to make it look like it wasn't so out of the norm for you to be at an event like that. It was. Your dad was right, you didn't like sports, you liked cheer squad and the parties and the players, not the game. But you had your eyes set on the coach today which is why you were there instead of working on your masters' assignments.

You couldn't even pretend to know what was going on, if it was football you had some experience from watching and hearing past flings talk about it, but soccer? You could only cheer for Jack and bicker with the soccer moms around as they talked about how much better their children were.

"Hey, lady if your son gets that close to Jack again I'm gonna jump him." You point your finger at one of them, decorum almost goes to hell as she begins walking in your direction, Rossi stepping in the way to apologize for your behavior.

Oh. You can't just threaten to hurt kids. That's not okay. "Sorry, just used to fighting with guys' girlfriends to defend my team. Cheer squad reflex memory." You say lowly directly to Aaron, not even bothering to apologize to your father. Your cheeks tomato red, a combination from the embarrassment and the sun that was making everyone sweat.

"It's fine, she has to teach her son fair play anyway, he's not gonna go far like that." His expression doesn't show even one single sign of being mad at you, you notice it, Rossi notices it. Aaron's actually smiling, completely amused by the situation.

It was nice to have someone sticking up for his boy like that.

And to have someone look at him with those eyes. Not the aw you're such a good dad eyes most mothers gave him when he's around for matches. Nope. The please fuck me eyes you always shot at him even if your father was around. For the sake of his loyalty to Rossi he pretended not to see it, as he knew Rossi did too. He hoped David didn't notice the eyes he himself gave you though, or that if he did, he was kind enough to ignore it, Aaron would never act on it. Never. He was twice your age if not more even if he weren't friends with David.

Still, he enjoyed the touches, the stolen glances, the way you wore your short dresses and skirts around him, the way you showed you cared above the desire for the unobtainable. How you sent him cute videos with show Jack as a caption, how you remembered to bring a towel not for yourself, but to pat his face dry, delicate as ever.

"People will think you were the one playing sweating like this." You go through his face and his neck with it, handing him a water bottle after. You brought those yourself too, you wanted to be useful.

Before he can hold it back, a smirk deliciously mischievous takes grip of his lips, "What can I say dear, I tend to sweat a bit when I'm doing any type of exercise." You're not sure if you wished you hadn't caught the innuendo of his reply, as you were now fighting hard not to squirm in front of him. Oh you wanted nothing more than to be the one making him sweat.

"Good thing your bedroom has an A.C then." You say almost mindlessly, panicking just a tad when you grasped the idea that maybe remembering that so easily wasn't the most normal thing to do. Did you just sound obsessive? Stalkerish? You think not when he chuckles, nodding in agreement.

You both just look at each other for a minute, breathing patterns completely irregular, being interrupted only by your father loudly coughing from some steps away from you both, tired of having to deal with the obvious tension between his daughter and his co-worker, his friend! Rossi doesn't say anything else though. And neither does Aaron or you, deciding to just go back to paying attention to the match.

But Hotch had just got you an in. If he hadn't flirted back you might just keep it as a crush, but now?

Now you needed him.

[hyperlexichypatia]

CN: This post is about child abuse.

I was talking to a younger neurodivergent person about their horrifically abusive childhood, which included their parents beating them, drugging them, and sending them to abusive therapies, and for some reason my immediate thought was: That's so unfair, you shouldn't be allowed to beat your children AND pathologize them!

To be clear. I believe you should be allowed to do NEITHER of those things. Physical abuse and psychiatric abuse are both wrong!

But at minimum, you should at least have to choose between old-school, authoritarian, beating, yelling, physical-abuse-based parenting and new-school, authoritative, pathologizing, psychiatrizing, emotional-abuse-based parenting. They're mutually incompatible Abuse Philosophies!

The one (1) good, semi-redeeming thing about the psychiatrization of childhood and parenting is that it teaches that beating children is bad for them. Truly the only beneficial thing about it!

I remember reading about local schools adopting a "positive behavior interventions" system, and having mixed feelings about it -- Behaviorism is abuse, absolutely. But I live in an area where the largely unquestioned cultural norm is to deal with children by beating them. If parents can't be persuaded in a day to convert to neurodiversity-affirming, youth-affirming, gentle discipline, isn't getting them to deal with children's "bad behavior" by taking away stickers better than what they're currently doing? Is "positive behavior intervention" the lesser evil, in this case?

But is it? Is it even effective at that? What's to stop parents from sending their kids to behavioral therapy and also beating them? I honestly don't know.

Whenever mad liberation people argue against psychiatric abuse (forced drugging, coercive therapy, institutionalization, etc), pro-psychiatric-coercion people always defend it as better than "the alternative" of physical abuse. It's always "Would you rather they go to prison? Would you rather they be homeless? Would you rather they get beaten or shot by police?"

And of course, that's a false choice, because we would rather neither! We would rather disabled/Mad/neurodivergent people be free. Not abused or coerced in any way at all!

In addition, I'm reminded of something my partner said about men who brag about being "nice guys who don't abuse women like those other men do": Even if they're telling the truth (which, often, they're not), the value of this as a braggable claim is dependent on abusers being widespread. Mediocre men benefit from the widespread existence of abusive men, by getting to be the less-bad alternative to something worse.

The same is true of psychiatric abuse being "better than" physical abuse: Even if psychiatric wards and group homes are better than prisons, even if therapizing children is better than beating them, even if social workers are less abusive than police, even if all these things are true, the argument for psychiatric abuse relies on keeping physical abuse as an option on the table.

And even so, to circle back to my original point: Does psychiatric abuse even prevent physical abuse? Certainly not always. It also doesn't prevent poverty or homelessness -- we always point out that it's possible to materially support people without controlling them, but also, it's possible to control people without materially supporting them at all. Stripping people of their autonomy in order to get them financially provided for... doesn't actually get them financially provided for.

I also talked to a younger neurodivergent person who was kicked out of their parents' home at age 18. Gee, I thought the entire purpose of reclassifying young adults as still-children, and disabled adults as forever-children, was to prevent that from happening? I thought we had to endorse abusive parenting because the alternative is homelessness? Turns out, people with abusive parents can still end up homeless!

The status of youth rights and disability rights is so messed up. Parents can do essentially whatever they want to their children (especially if their children are disabled). It's disgusting and it's morally reprehensible at every level. I don't have an uplifting ending for this one.

[foone]

Please don’t feel obligated to reply because this might be a touchy issue, but i see on one of your posts that you hate Hacker News. I just discovered HN a few months ago and have been enjoying it, but as a fellow trans person i’m curious if they’ve been transphobic or the like (based on the context of your comment) and if i should stay away

OKAY SO here's thing thing: as a reader, HN is... fine. They're not great. They have a history of sexism in what posts get boosted and a history of various shades of transphobia in the comments, but that's not particularly unusual as far as internet forums go. Reddit is much the same, for example.

My problems with HN are related to getting posted there. The way the site works when you're reading it and when you're getting posted there are very different. More explanation under the readmore since this got long. (warning: some talk of transphobia and doxxing)

The site is not avoidable. Back when I was still on twitter, getting posted on HN meant your notifications were useless for a week, because they are scraped by endless bots trying to farm for likes and reblogs, and every single one of them ends up tagging you. And even now when I'm off twitter, getting posted there means you still get informed that you've been posted there, by well-meaning people who know you hate it, or are just innocently commentating on how it's neat to see you on HN. Or hey, in the latest iteration, you find out because your askbox is now full of slurs (and not just the ones you'd expect!). Basically, it is impossible to be submitted to HN and not know about it.

And then it gets worse because it's now a known fact that I don't like being on HN. Meaning every time I AM on HN, it turns into a big debate in the comments about why I don't like HN, why I post the way I do, and people arguing with the explanation of my opinion. I'm not even there, and people are mad at the phantom of me for not doing things in the way they like.

Because how I post is part of what they always get mad at me about. I have severe ADHD: This is a well known fact about me, I post about it a lot. It means that I used to post on twitter a lot, because twitter was (at the time) one of the only sites I could post on at all: The way it makes you chop up your line of thinking into small chunks, each of which is small enough that I can focus on it. I've since managed to handle tumblr-posting, and I occasionally post on mastodon now, but for most of the time that I was posted on HN, I was posting this way, only on twitter, in long threads where I don't think much ahead or do editing/revisions BECAUSE I CAN'T.

And here's the thing about people who prefer more "traditional" geek news sites like HN: A lot of them are there because they hate the bite-size nature of sites like twitter and tiktok. And they are Not Happy with people submitting twitter threads to HN: They hate that kind of formatting of content, and announce that fact, loudly.

And then people in the comments point out that I have ADHD and can't post in the style they'd prefer (long well-edited blog posts), and then it turns into an argument there, often with people happily brining up their opinions on whether ADHD is "real" or things like that. Again, I'm getting argued about without being there to defend myself.

And this is where it gets transphobic, through the indirect route of sexism: Someone says something innocent but vaguely dickish like "well he should just hire someone to rewrite all his twitter posts as blog posts!" (like they think I am doing this as a job and can afford to pay an editor, rather than just some weirdo who rants because that's what they do). They assume I'm a man, because most of the people who get posted on HN (and especially the ones who get upvoted) are. They just assume everyone without an Obviously Female Name and a profile picture that's a photo of a smiling woman is male, and honestly they're probably right most of the time, because that's just how the gender balance on HN ends up working.

And then someone points out I use they/them pronouns, and it just goes to shit. You get people yelling that it's not their job to figure out the pronouns of everyone they're talking about, like it's a perfectly normal thing to just assume everyone is male, you get people arguing about how "he" used to be the gender neutral pronoun, you get people arguing that singular-they is ungrammatical, you get people taking offense at the very idea of they/them pronouns because "you can't force everyone to follow your religion" (as apparently either trans or non-binary is a religion now (well, I am a pope)), and then a bunch of "[post flagged]" and you can only speculate about how bad THOSE posts were, if so much other transphobia is still sitting in the comments, untouched by the supposed moderators who are supposed to delete it.

You get people calling you mentally ill, and then getting in arguments about how they mean YOU SPECIFICALLY for the crime of "wanting to not be posted on HN", and not all trans people. Because apparently the HN rules are fine with you saying "this specific trans person is mentally ill and should be locked up" as long as you don't imply that your statements also apply to trans people in general.

And then you get hate in your contact forms for days because people realize you're not active on the HN comments and need to bring the "fight" to you directly.

And frankly, this whole mess is made worse by the site's userbase treating it as a joke or something easily fixable. Like, aside from making my pronouns "obvious" (I'm not sure how, exactly? it's already in all my profiles) which wouldn't help, they want me to just move to a different site, one where I can easily block incoming links by their referrer? They always point to JWZ's blog as an example of this, but he's hosting his posts on his own site. He fundamentally is doing something very different than I am, and I really shouldn't have to CHANGE WHAT SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS I USE just because they're being a butt.

And treating it like a joke? oy vey! I once posted a rant on tumblr about WHY EXACTLY I don't like getting posted on HN, and guess what happened next? SOMEONE POSTED THAT THREAD ON HN.

They also have a history of getting mad at me for not wanting to be posted on HN, like it's prima-dona behavior or "egotistical". Like I should be just happy that my stuff got posted there, something that has only ever brought negative attention. I think maybe they assume I'm doing this as a job, and every time they link to my stuff, I make a bunch of money? That's not the case. I don't make any money from them. I don't have ads. This isn't my job. (Fun fact: I know at least one person who has their blog set up to show ads only when HN links to their content, and not otherwise)

I really don't know why they think it's egotistical of me to not want to get harassed, dismissed, and spammed by their site and their users. It's almost like they think it's me posting my content on HN myself, which I would never do because it doesn't aid me in any way. If I was making content for them, I would make sure it gets posted there. I'm not, so I don't. I post for the sites I post on. I could blog in a way they'd like and then post it to HN if I wanted to. I don't. I choose to tweet (in the past) or post on tumblr or post on mastodon, because I'm posting for those specific communities.

And the thing about it is that all these points are, to some extent, obvious. And people know them. Maybe not the people posting the most unthinking takes on HN, but others will point them out. So this just contributes to any HN thread on my posts turning into a big argument.

And there's always people going "WELL JUST DON'T READ THE POSTS ABOUT YOU" as if that's a reasonable option. first of all, I can't be ignorant about them, as mentioned before they kick down my door and go HEY FOONE YOU'RE ON HACKERNEWS. But more importantly, I'm trans. Do you know what happens if enough people get mad at you online? They start posting your home address, phone number, and pictures of your face and relatives. I have to stay at least SLIGHTLY aware of how the discussion on me is going, or I'll be completely surprised when someone shows up at my house with a gun. (This isn't hyperbole: I have gotten doxxed before because I made a twitter thread that got the wrong people a little too mad at me)

Anyway I've talked to the admins of the site and they have basically refused to do anything about it. They admit that they can block my posts from showing up on the site, but they don't want to because people enjoy my content. My wishes don't matter.

And anyway the epilogue is that this has mostly worked out by now. I stopped posting on twitter, not because HN was pushing me to a site where I could better control my post's reach, but because Elon destroyed it. I'm posting longer-form content now, not because my ADHD got better, but because years of training myself to write this way has made it so that I can handle writing as if I was on twitter-like sites, without the enforced restrictions of them.

And I have countermeasures against HN now. Offensive and defensive ones. I'm a little less likely to be posting Cool Tech Stuff here on tumblr now (because every time this happens it severely dampens my enthusiasm for the subject), but I'm a lot less worried that something I post will end up on HN now, as I have options. (I don't want to go into them because HN being HN, they might take preemptive counter-countermeasures to try to disarm them).

Anyway, tl;dr: it's okay if you like reading the site. my problems with it are with getting submitted there, not with reading it. As long as you don't submit my content there, that's 100% okay with me.

[monstermoviedean]

i think there is a point where while the framing of dean and cas's relationship is frustrating, it's more indicative of like. the writers failing to understand dean and cas's relationship or a result of not hiring misha as a third lead for the show, so castiel comes off as extremely flaky and continues repeating his mistakes even when he says he'll do better.

basically we should all hope robbie thompson or steve yockey is the showrunner for a potential revival bc they seem to understand dean really well.

like while i Understand that these actions are consistent for castiel it also mostly feels like writers struggling to actually let him grow rather than entirely his fault?

like i've seen deancrit casgirls look at dean kicking out cas in the bunker and basically go "that's completely bullshit and out of character, i'm not gonna incorporate it into my understanding of dean as a character because that's very obviously the hand of the author preventing dean and cas from interacting while cas is a human, because it would be gay"

i kind of think that cas should be extended that same kind of grace in being like. the writers don't seem to see this as an issue and as a result even though it is one, it's hard to see a character grow when most writers dont seem to recognize it as a problem.

like steve yockey identifies it as an issue in lily sunder, when dean is mad/worried about cas the entire episode for making a call on his own (killing billie) but is still defending him from ishim. but berens doesn't seem to see it as a repeated problem in 15x09, so it's not brought up except as a snide comment from dean.

that being said i think castiel thinks of himself as disposable, so him using his love and devotion as a weapon to save dean is wonderful for him but ultimately devastating for dean, who has never viewed cas as replaceable.

like cas firmly believes that his emotions don't matter, that his feelings don't matter (his own insecurities and upbringing), so dean saying "no you do matter, of course you matter" is wonderful! but unfortunately he made the deal with the empty, and he probably realizes how bad he fucked up making that deal (it's claire and jimmy again, it's john and dean again, making a deal to save your child that dooms the people around you to grieve your loss)

it's just very very tragic, and sad. i wish supernatural was good.

sorry for rambling lmao.

it's a yes/and for me. yes, cas has to be off-screen a lot because of budgetary reasons, and the writers could have addressed that in different ways that made it seem less like cas being flaky. as for repeating his mistakes and not being able to grow, i think that's a separate issue, but a writer issue as well. there are ways to address cas repeating mistakes that don't blame dean for those mistakes.

i try to reserve my judgment of something as ooc to a few extreme situations. that's just my personal preference. i can think of a handful of actions across the show that are best-explained by ooc writing. dean telling cas he can't stay in 09x03 is not one of those. i don't like it, obviously, but i can see why dean did that and why it makes sense in his context.

i get what you're saying about extending grace to cas, and yes, writer actions are always at play here, but i try to view and interpret situations based on what is happening in the show itself. again, personal preference, and i don't always stick to that. but for me, if i only looked at everything through the lens of "writers made them do it," that wouldn't be very fun for me because yeah, writers made them do all of it and it's a work of fiction.

but extending grace to cas - i always try to extend grace to everyone. i really do. sometimes i fail! i get frustrated that i often see others extending grace to cas and intentionally withholding it from others who they don't think deserve it. it's a double standard i find aggravating.

[wenellyb]

Hello, I know you’re new to the fandom so I just want to tell you you two things:

1. You can be mad a Ryan for what he said but believing he only apologised for keeping the job is just projecting. Oliver was mad too and not only him but more members and he didn’t speak to Ryan in years, they’re friends now, that means that Ryan is human and he has learnt, because we all made mistake and we all have to unlearn and educate ourselves.

Also, and please I love Tommy, but it’s also fun seeing how a lot of people (who hates Ryan/Eddie and Buddie) defend Tommy when he was racist and misogynistic when we met him. And he didn’t apologise, we just saw him talking with Chim and helping them and assumed that he did. So, if people can forgive a character and defend him saying “he has grown up and he has learnt and he made mistakes because he’s human and Chim and Hen have forgiven him”, we can say the same to a real human who was also forgiven by Oliver, Aisha and other members.

2. As people said, Roben from lone star (I don’t even know if that’s how you write his name) supports the genocide. He’s also problematic in different ways, and he hasn’t apologised, not even once. In fact, he has done the opposite and he hasn’t taken the time to unlearn and educate himself.

I’m not here to make you love Ryan, but we can learn from our mistakes. And maybe, if you can’t see just that, maybe it’s because you’re not ready and that’s why you’re projecting your feelings towards his apology. Anyways, that’s all! Bye!

Hi Anon!!!

Please don't mix 2 things:

- Tommy: fictional person

- Ryan Guzman : Actual real person

No matter how bad Tommy's actions have been, you can't compare the 2. It's easier for me to believe that a character has grown than a real person even though it happens all the time.

Now that we made that clear, please show me the post of people defending Tommy's past actions, because I'm not saying there aren't any, I'm saying I haven't seen any.

The post I have seen were posts calling out Tommy's past actions but saying he has grown since then , especially he made up with Chimney and Hen, exactly everthing you are saying about Ryan Guzman. You're saying there hasn't been an onscreen apology but with the kid of show 911 is...there are always scenes missing, where we have to guess what happened in between.

And again no!!! Fictional characters are not the same as real people! I love Anakin Skywalker but would hate him in real life (extreme example I know). Moving past Tommy's actions isn't the same as moving past Ryan's actions.

What you can do is compare Ryan's actions to Lou's actions: two actual people.

And take a look at your fandom, that is calling for forgiveness , education and growth for one, but calling for the other one to get fired??

Can you see why I'm annoyed by the double standards?

Especially since Lou's video was taken out of context.

This isn't against you anon personnally it's more a general statement, but fandoms will select whether or not to be mad based on whether the person involved is their fave or not.

So let me tell you the timeline of what happened and you'll let me know when I "projected my feelings about his apology":

1. I saw an interview where Ryan Guzman was defending the use of the n-word by non-Black people adding the classic "I have Black friends..."

2. I reblogged the interview and tagged it "wtf"

3. I received asks telling me about it and how bad it was, and pointed out the hypocrisy of the fandom because they wanted Lou to get fired for his "teasing" comment about Tommy but didn't want the same for Ryan.

4. I pointed out that the apology didn't feel genuine because instead of apologizing right away he, at first, doubled down on what he said.

Mind you, I never told anyone to get mad at Ryan, or ask for him to get fired, I was just pointing out the double standards.

I appreciate yoy sending this, and again, as I said this isn't "against" you I'm just taking the opportunity to share how I see this whole thing.

I'm of course new to this fandom, but I'm not new to fandoms in general, and this is the Sebastian Stan take a knee instagram post all over again. I know how it goes, I'm not surprised by the influx of messages about growth and forgiveness etc... But when those scandales involve people who are not your faves they get feral...

[katyspersonal]

I know we don't talk and there's stuff we may not agree with. But I am truly sorry you've dealt with a lot of drama over fictional crap. And I'm sorry if my posts in the past ever contributed to that. Hope you have a better day.

Hey... That's all fine, don't worry! After all, it takes a lot of time and Insight to realise that Gehrman is a very gentle and respectful man and Godrick is an absolute gigachad kdkdkshdffhhgfds /lh /lh

But yeah, on a serious note. It was quite frustrating to find out the real motivation under all that... mess was something so pathetic, but at the same time this is what happens when people make engagement with media and fandoms a moral, political act. Not necessarily a problem, after all, I was the one who concluded that the way a fan judges fictional characters and other fans will very well reveal how cruel they are to real people who do something bad, or how much they will forgive based on personal sympathies. And my mad ravings about caring about female characters! I think the problem comes when a fan is so insecure that they have nothing else besides this defence of ideals through fandomry. If your only way to assert yourself is to be a good guy punishing the bad guys, and that mad raving loredigger discovers there is NO bad guy, what is left of you?

This is why it is crucial to have passion for nurturing rather than for undermining! I think if you speak like this, you've found this truth too? This is true that I don't know you very much (mutual-in-law thing), but to be honest.. you didn't poison my fandom experience at all? I tend to never be aware about discourse until someone basically calls me for help fhdhgsdgdfs Can't scout the fandom tag regularly!

But not only it actually was a quite long ago I saw a "negative" post from you, but also I've seen through the posts that my friends liked or reblogged from you that you've actually became very eager person to defend people's passion and interests! I think the post that particularly got stuck with me was when you resented seeing someone's light die after some Redditor asshole "well aktualy"'d a thing they were excited about creating (not exact wording but maybe you remember too)? Like... you are fine, man. At that point I realised that you were a good fan and in the end valued people's creativity and passion over personal preferences. That you never wanted to be THAT guy, even if your interpretation could not be further from someone else's. Coming to terms with what actually matters in fandomry is very mature and I am happy to see this attitude!

I am still glad that you messaged me about this though; I did not expect this, but thank you! I think I will continue getting involved in fictional discourse because my autistic senses cannot ignore factually incorrect takes with a clear insidious motive, and.. eh, sooner or later, I'll piss off the wrong guy again. Don't feel bad for me when it inevitably happens :p I've accepted the shortcomings when I decided to be the debate guy. Simply laughing at some gremlin starting a discourse with the girls in DMs and not stressing over it is only funny until I realise that newer fans could get misinformed right off the bat.

[struggle-but-its-all-ocean-floor]

Do you think something snapped in the dynamic between army and taehyung? It's kinda crazy to me seeing so many people openly admit that they don't want him there~ some of the people I follow on social media are very close to coming out as jikook ot2 but I have also seen actual ot7 armys say that even though they'd like to see content from different subunits within bts they don't feel like V was a necessary addition to the show. Many jikookers who used to swear they loved all members and they were nothing like taekookers were openly shading V on main and, even though from most of them I don't see the absolute malice and disgust taekookers have to talk about jimin, it is now pretty obvious that they can't stand V at all. I'm not actually mad about this, I think it would be healthy for army to move into a mindset where it's acceptable not to like everything they do or not loving all members. I mean, I've always been a fan of bands where I love some members and I don't know or actually don't give a fuck about others lmao so getting into kpop and seeing that not loving every member of a group as if they were your children was treated as a crime against humanity was kind of insane to me, but yeah, seeing this sudden change has been interesting

I think V has become one of the most divisive members. His solo music wasn't very impactful, either in terms of popularity or artistry, and most of the content he released was variety with non-members and photoshoots, which isn't necessarily the content fans want. On top of that, there's the whole Jennie thing, him working with MHJ, and even people judging him for some of his Wooga squad friends. I think the other members' solo ventures resonated more with Army, so he probably isn't as talked about anymore.

And of course Taekookers hating Jimin would create resentment among Jikookers, staining their opinion on V. Since Jungkook and V hung out so much in chapter 2 while Jikook's bond was constantly questioned, a lot of Jikookers are angry at V, even though it's not his fault. However, V dropping a pic with JK when Muse came out and AYS got announced, without acknowledging Muse at all, made a lot of Jikookers pretty mad, as they interpreted V's post as an attack against Jimin and Jikook. And that's not even the first time Jikookers accused V of not supporting Jimin or fueling Taekookers. If it weren't for Taekookers, Jikookers wouldn't even be upset about any of this... This is what happens in fandoms...

But I haven't seen the same treatment towards V from non-Jikookers though, even if V, imo, doesn't have the same standing in the fandom as before. I think his path in chapter 2 diverged from what the other members chose to do, in terms of priorities, which kind of separated him from BTS and the fandom a bit. He's still well loved though.

And being OT7 to me has always meant appreciating the group as a whole and respecting each member and dynamic individually. I love BTS and each member as family, but I've never felt the same about all of them. Jungkook is the only member I have true devotion for. I love, defend, keep up with, and appreciate the others members, but without the same drive. I'm also a lot more interested in Jimin than the other 5 members, and while I love Jin as much as Jimin, the content he releases isn't for me, so I'm not looking that forward to it (just the album and performances + Run Jin to a lesser extent). This is all personal taste. Love and loving someone to the point of being able to stream their music all day are two different things. Love is a spectrum, and we don't love or need any two people the same.

The fandom is very OT7 because Armys know there are many solos, shippers, and people who hate one of the members. BTS are strong as seven, as a group, so Army can't let the fandom fracture. It would lead to worse results for BTS and make the fandom more toxic and unruly. Armys need to be organized, focused, and share the same goals. They also like to cover all bases and ensure BTS don't have any weak links. Moreover, OT7 is part of BTS's branding and something BTS themselves are very committed to, and Army always defend BTS's interests. Promoting OT7 is strategic in many ways. It's also a way for fans to recognize like minded fans. But no one is truly OT7 in the sense of treating and loving all seven members the same. That's practically impossible.

[uselessidiotsquad]

Should you fight my characters? Plant Flavor!

Back at it with more!

Riaghael

Battle Music: Saltillo - A Necessary End

Should you fight Riag? Look I get it, you get it, even he gets it - he's not the most amiable person in the world. He's usually grumpy and sometimes even an asshole. He wouldn't even be mad at if you if you tried to fight him. But no one is winning from this fight. You will likely feel like crap trying to fight someone who (is trying but) cannot fight back, and guaranteed he will feel even worse. Trying to fight someone who is well aware of that they aren't what they used to be is a little mean - so please don't fight the grump.

Who initiates the battle? You would have to, he knows he can't win in fights anymore so he doesn't try to start anything.

Who would win? You would. He physically can't wield weapons anymore and mentally/psychologically is unable to deal with the stress of it. It wouldn't even be a fair fight, he would summon minions to try to defend himself but that's it. You would still be able to take him down pretty quickly.

Deiliús

Battle Music: anoice - finale

Should you fight Dei? They are the least threatening person you can encounter. ...so why on Tyria would you? The only reason I could ever see someone trying to fight them is them being a rigid 'All NMC are evil and must die' type of person. They have all the strength of wet tissue paper and are allergic to conflict. Don't fight them. You stand nothing to gain from it (besides my unwavering disapproval).

Who initiates the battle? You would HAVE to. They would expend all of their energy just trying to run from you than have to fight. Even if cornered they would try to fend off attacks but not fight back.

Who would win? There's no question that you would win. It would be like kicking a stray cat on the street that had just gotten its ass kicked from other cats. Their magic is illusion based for concealment or psychological harm (which they hated using and only did in the past because they were forced to) not for attacking. It wouldn't even really be a fight, it would be you kicking their ass.

Under the cut to save your dash!

Naechdion

Battle Music: Shadow of the Colossus OST - Silence

Should you fight Dion? No! Absolutely not! He's minding his own business in the Wychmire and is already scared of everything. Leave him be.

Who would initiate the battle? You would have to start it - but that means finding him first. He's very good at hiding.

Who would win? You would, but then you would probably have to fight me because Dion doesn't deserve to be picked on. He's bad at Guardian magic and scared of everything, he would probably be shaking in a corner as soon as you got anywhere near him.

Ruby Aenn

Battle Music: Dallas String Quartet - Firework

Should you fight Ruby? Ruby is always up for a good fair sparring session. Actual fights, she thinks can be avoided with enough discussion but sparring for practice is fun! She's game for a bit of a spat if you are!

Who would initiate the fight? 50/50! She might want to warm up before a bigger skirmish and ask you to spar with her. Or perhaps you feel like trying the Prismatic Dragon's Champion on for size.

Who would win? Ruby has some very clear strong points and weaknesses. For one, she's tiny, just at 4'9, so her center of balance makes her harder to take down. Most especially challenging is that she changes her fight strategy depending on which pet she is soulbound to. So that's tricky. However, it is easy to bait while attuned to specific animals and that makes her slip up because the animal side wins. It would be fair!

Madrúil

Battle Music: The Dali Thundering Concept - There is no Calm Before the Storm (Instrumental)

Should you fight Mad? Oh god, please kick his ass. He has made life hell for a lot of innocent people and deserves to get the shit kicked out of him. You would be making a lot of people happy.

Who would initiate the fight? Chances are Mad would since he thinks with his fists more often than his brain. Or he would be trying to abduct you for his hounds to 'play with' so you had to defend yourself.

Who would win? Tricky. Mad is good at both long range with his bow and close melee with axes, but struggles at mid-range. If you have something that can keep him just close enough to you to not be able to use his long bow but not so close you meet the axe, you can probably out last him. That is until he goes full chicken shit and gets other Blasphemy goonies to try and waylay you. He's not above being a slime ball to win.

Countess Diamhasla

Battle Music: Romanian Folk Dances, Sz 56: III. Pe-loc - Andante

Should you fight Diam? PLEASE DO. Can I help? I would love to help. We can throw her down a well. She sets people up for failure, and when they are at their most vulnerable she 'saves' them, only to then hold that over their head to get what she wants. She's fragile and has poor health but I'm not above beating her leafy head in with a mallet.

Who would initiate the battle? You would, she doesn't do fighting. Usually letting her henchmen do the dirty work for her. Half of the issue of fighting her is actually getting to her, she's fairly well defended.

Who would win? She's scary good at earth magic, so the key would be to interrupt her before she can summon too many elementals or the huge earthen hands to grab you. If you can hit hard and fast, you win, easy. But if you let her get too many spells off it's looking like she will win.

Warden Captain Cálguais

Battle music: Andry Vinogradov - Chain Dance

Should you fight Cal? They're the most honorable (to the point of being insufferable) person to fight. If you asked for an honorable dual they would be happy to oblige you but in any other situations they would not. To spar for the sake of improvement (since they will be telling you the whole time where you could have done better) sure! Fight them!

Who would initiate the battle? Either you asking to spar with them or them training baby Wardens and asking you to spar as an example.

Who would win? Likely you would, but not easily. They are pretty competent at fighting but they tend to be rigid and fixed in their training they learned so they can't always adapt to new threats.

Glanaim

Battle music: Gallowstreet - Fisticuffs

Should you fight Glan? Sure, as long as you realize he treats fighting like flirting half the time. Morally he's a grey person so you don't have much to lose by fighting him. He doesn't kill people unless he's paid to do so so go for it!

Who would initiate the fight? Depends! If he's in a good mood, he'll ask you to spar with him. Otherwise you'd have to approach the topic.

Who would win? If you give him any distance at all, he will win so fast it makes your head spin. He's a sniper, and a damn good one at that. If you go after him in melee you have a very strong chance of winning, since he's not as good with pistols as he is with his rifle. (bonus there's a high chance he asks you out for a drink and then a rematch later).

Caonai

Battle Music: Skyrim OST - Tooth and Claw

Should you fight Cao? I don't recommend it. She doesn't see the point of fighting without killing - so if you challenge her one of you is going down for good. Plus she's an older lady who just is trying to care for her siblings. Sure, she may not have social skills, but she keeps to herself.

Who initiates the battle? If she thinks you are going to harm her siblings or pose a threat to the remnants of her family, she will absolutely start it. And give you no warning, you will just have a Norn sized, winter-hardened Warrior after you.

Who would win? Cao would win unless you run away mid-fight. She fights to kill, not to spar. While she is not as strong as some of my other kiddos, she is very slow and unyielding. She aims to break your defenses before going in for any major damage with her mace. If you run, she might not chase you - having tired herself out.

Caemdryn

Battle Music: LORN - ENTANGLED

Should you fight Caem? Honestly, it's up to you. While he is not a bad person, he has so much anger (mainly at Charr and the Jungle but it bleeds over) that it makes him a twat at times. Would there be any major negatives to getting rid of him? No. Any positives? Not really.

Who would initiate the battle? I think you would have to but it wouldn't take much. All it would take is a comment about Sylvari being dragon minions in any shape or form to get him defensive and then he will be after you.

Who would win? In close quarters, Caem, hands down. He hits hard and fast and has no small amount of fury/unhinged behind it. At distance he can't really attack but he can block and shield himself from most projectiles. Best bet would be to try and slow/cripple him and then get him from range so he can't close the space.

[moodymillennialmom]

So I am late to the Stranger Things party but having just watched season 1 for a second time I think I have an unpopular opinion.......

Steve is not a jerk or bully or anything other than a typical teenager in season 1. The bad things he does are all reactionary and he does everything he can to make up for it after. Teenagers are not known for their forethought so a teenager getting mad or upset and doing something shitty and realizing later "oh shit I shouldn't have done that" is kinda how teenagers are.

* Breaking Jonathan's camera.

I actually have no issue with him doing this. It's 100% justified. Those pictures were creepy and gross and a crime. He not only took them he developed them at school where at least one other person saw them to even tell Steve about them. These could have easily been taken, copied and passed around. So taking them was bad, developing them worse, but doing at school was just awful and stupid. Even still Steve felt bad and bought him a new camera, which as I have no issue with breaking the camera is, well, whatever, it's nice but he didn't have to in my opinion.

Now these next two I'm not going to defend so much as understand a teenage mind set and point out his actions after.

They kinda go together. So spray painting the sign and the fight with Jonathan. He was wrong in both cases . Totally and completely wrong. He humiliated and slut shamed Nancy in a very public way and he said terrible things about Jonathan's mom and 'dead' brother and used a slur. This is however where I point out a teenage mindset. Steve thinks based on what he saw Nancy is cheating with Jonathan. Which would suck bad enough for anyone but given we were told earlier his mom can't trust his dad to not cheat it is probably an especially touchy spot for Steve. He's angry and hurting and he lashes out. He was wrong, there's no justification for that and I am not justifying just saying that teenagers act first and think later and a hurt teenager is especially irrational. I don't think either thing is indicative of his normal behavior.

Where I think we go back to Steve is a good guy is that he realizes that on his own. No one tells him he was wrong, if anything the people around him at that moment are encouraging this behavior. He then goes and cleans off the sign himself. The next thing he does is go to apologize to Jonathan, not Nancy but Jonathan. That is important because he's not doing it to try to save his relationship or whatever. He goes to Jonathan because he feels bad.

The other time he is kind of jerky is when Nancy tells him she went to the police about Barb. Again not his best moment his first reaction is scared to get in trouble. This again is pretty typical teenage behavior. He doesn't know Barb and is quite frankly more concerned about himself than her. He sucks but I want you to really think about how much thought you gave to the kids you went to highschool with who were not your friends and then get back to me on whether or not you would ask someone to at least not mention the underage drinking. The honest people are going to admit that Steve's request to not mention the beer to cops is probably something they would have asked as well.

All teenagers act impulsively. That's the whole reason most of these story lines happen is because the teenagers/kids do things without consulting adults. Steve is just the only one whose actions as a teenager keep getting brought up and used against him. I mean when was the last time anyone even brought up Jonathan's creepy photos?

Everyone keeps saying Steve has had so much character growth and I would agree but unlike everyone else who says he is becoming a better person I think he is just growing up. He is maturing. He's always been a decent person but he was an impulsive (probably lonely) teenager and now he is becoming an adult.

[rjalker]

I hate it when there's a sequal or something like Quantum Leap's reboot where people love to defend the shitty writing by saying, "You shouldn't compare it to the show it's literally based on!!! You have to take it just as it is on its own!! Stop comparing it to what came before!!!"

Like, no, actually, you do not get to say that.

If you do reboot of an old series, you are, in fucking fact, inviting comparisons and critiques about what you do wrong that the first one did right. By pure fucking fact that you choose to do a sequel/reboot rather than original fiction.

If you don't want your shitty new version that does everything wrong to constantly be compared to the much older work that is, despite its age, immensely more progressive, then don't fucking write reboots or sequels. Write original fiction.

You don't get to write a continuation for a series, butcher everything that made the original work, and then cry and complain when everyone points out all the ways you're failing that the original got right.

Bad writing is bad writing, and bad writing in comparison to good writing is even more obvious and blatant.

You don't get to be mad when people compare Quantum Leap 2: Electric Boogaloo to the original Quantum Leap.

Especially not when Quantum Leap 2022 is so far racist, homomisic, fucking demonizing wolves in 2023, and had multiple episodes in a row telling abused kids they have to forgive their abusive parents otherwise they're a bad person >.>

Like just admit you enjoy a show that's terribly written. Don't insist that it's above reproach and shouldn't be compared to the show it's literally based on and the only reason it exists in the first place.

"you can't compare this to the literal entire basis for it's existance!"

Yes, actually, I can, and you should, and you're just a boring fucking coward.

[sweetmariihs2]

Eddie is just protecting himself AND his friends, unlike Lucas--

Just starting the post justifying myself that i'm not defending Eddie because he's my favorite character, before people start saying this, i've been watching ST since season 1 WITHOUT Eddie, three seasons since it came out, so like, i may not know everything about the show but i know enough to debate why i don't agree with this.

First of all, based on my life experiences, i know how it feels to be an "outcast" — after many years of being bullied, i also became a non-conformist, i started to fight a lot for people who were also excluded and misunderstood just like me (and i believe that if i hadn't gone through this, maybe today i wouldn't be so informed about the struggles involving minorities, such as the lgbt community, and I'm very grateful for that. If I hadn't suffered I wouldn't be who I am right now, and since I can't go back in time, I believe it helped me to become the good person that i am today). But getting right back to the point, i know how it feels to be in his place, and how he feels about that.

All this rebellion of his (better saying; his rebellion in the first scene, only happened because of a set of things:

Most simple reason first: that magazine talking bullshit about his refuge, probably because DnD is where he goes to feel a little better about his life problems. It's like watching someone cursing the name of something you love and helped you so much.

Everyone in Hawkins High calls him a freak, and he knows that. Been bullied for years enough to understand this, he was so mad because of that magazine, always remarking satanic panic and prejudice against metalheads at the time, and that made him very angry because he already had enough.

The fear of not passing the year again. if he wasn't thinking about it, he wouldn't have said it in the conversation.

So like, he was very, very mad at this point. With everything. He's a very kind and genuine person, you can see it in that scene in the woods with Chrissy, fans even asked Joe what scene would define Eddie's personality and he said that this one does. So he IS a good person after all.

But as you can see, inside the school he protects himself with a thick shell, so as not to hurt his feelings with people he knows that don't like him. You mentioned Erica, not that he feels threatened by an 11/12 year old, but in general he feels threatened to let a person who doesn't share the same feelings he does for the game, join Hellfire. Like, what if this girl is only there to make fun of them? Or just simply don't understand how much DnD matters to Hellfire? And much more. This would have happened to anyone in Erica's place, even if it wasn't her.

And he's not "mocking people that aren't like him", he's fighting back people who treat him like shit everyday y'know? Not saying that EVERYONE there treats him badly, but most of them, for sure. If not cursing then at least judging his looks and rumors running through the halls along with satanic panic.

And the matching t-shirts are just a club thing. The basketball team wears matching uniforms, in my middle school time i also had matching shirts with people from my class, so that's very normal.

And i'm gonna make a separated post talking about what happened with that situation with Lucas and the basketball game, but in short, think with me: Eddie was bullied his whole life. Everyone in Hellfire also were bullied their whole lives. The party; Mike, Lucas, Dustin, Will, everyone. But different from Eddie, who screams "that's who i am and you need to learn how to deal with it!!" (Which, honestly, is the best reaction to bullying that a person can have), and you need to be proud of being one of the outcasts. You need to be proud and defend your group of insecure and bullied friends, of asshole people who treat you and your friends badly. But Lucas?????? He only said "well guys i'm tired of being bullied (which is quite understandable) so i'm gonna leave you there, my best friends during my whole life, to try to make friends with people who treat us bad, so this way i'm not gonna suffer anymore" wait what??? Lucas??????? You should defend your friends! You should scream "that's who i am! I'm not gonna be ashamed of myself, and the only wrong people here are the assholes who made us feel less all of our lives!"

I know it takes a lot of courage to do this, but honestly, it's better than betray your friends to get closer to people who treat them bad, just so you ALONE can stop suffering a little bit. You guys forgot about this scene???

Lucas didn't said ANYTHING. He just let it happen, even feeling bad about it, he didn't help his friends. And you guys are trying to defend him??????

"Ahh but Eddie was mad because Lucas wasn't going to Hellfire anymore, he couldn't remark it for another day??"

No guys, Dustin said some scenes before, Eddie was planning this for six months. And it was the last day before spring break, so they would need to wait for spring break to end, to FINALLY start planning again where and when they were going to do the campaign. But then a friend say "ohh i can't do it because i'll be traveling for a week", then ok, a week later, the other one "i need to work with my dad", and in the next day "my mom is sick". Everything was very well planned and is important to everyone there.

And not only that, the insides of the school would be open at night just in ONE night, where everyone would be watching the basketball game and they would have the drama club at night with that dark ambience and silence in the halls of the school, so like, it would be a perfect night for them to finally finish their story. Planning for SIX months, only for one of their friends, who is almost betraying them, ask if they can "postpone". Of course not.

At last, but not least;

They are non-conformists because they can't conform with the way society treats them. They ARE going to make noise, like Eddie does for example, and yes, people hate this, because he's entering his "freak" character and wearing that tough shell (and because they don't know and they don't care about how he feels being called a freak day after day). He's just trying to make people mad and gain some attention, because no one cares about him or what he does.

That's it. I think i'm gonna crop the "Lucas and basketball game" part because it turned out good and i'm gonna make a separated post for this subject.

Rereading you small analysis a few times to argument back, now i'm wondering how is you interpretation of this show. Because man, what you wrote is so distorted it makes me worried

eddie munson is a hypocrite

btw eddie is NOT fully anti-conformity and eddie munson IS a hypocrite. the sheer irony of the ‘anti-conformity club’/hellfire club having matching t shirts is almost enough on its own but just look at how eddie mocks people who aren’t like him. he doesn’t just mock people who antagonize him, like the jocks, he mocks EVERYONE who isn’t like him or who doesn’t align with what he wants (such as dustin and mike when they ask to move the game which is a whole other post abt eddie trying to toughen them up because the real world is tough but in reality he is playing a role in creating that tough real world via the way he treats them/repeating the cycle of abuse in a way), eddie is NOT anti-conformity, especially not in the beginning: he just wants people to conform to HIM and HIS ideals and standards. he is not anti-rules, he wants people to play by HIS rules. he’s been outcast by society and now seeks to outcast others instead of trying to overthrow the outcasting overall.  eddie munson and ted wheeler are far more similar than either one of them would like to admit: both of them are conformity under the guise of nonconformity, both of them use a shield of the idea of nonconformity as a means through which they enforce their standards of conformity. ted does not present himself as pro-conformity, at least not fully. instead, he uses a guise of nonconformity, saying things like ‘if your friend jumped off a bridge, would you?’ as a way of enforcing his own standards of conformity. he doesn’t want mike to jump off the bridge because he’s following someone else- but he also doesn’t want mike to deviate from conforming to ted’s standards and ideals. eddie is the same. eddie talks about nonconformity and being a freak but then ostracizes and mocks people who are different from him. both eddie and ted want people to conform to THEIR rules and attempts to execute such a desire by through false ideas of nonconformity. they don’t want to undo systems of oppression, so to speak, THEY just want to be the oppressors, the ones in charge.  like it’s no coincidence that the hellfire club has such a specific hierarchy and dynamic: when we see the party (dustin lucas mike and will) playing dnd on their own, they DO have a dm, but there’s still a pretty equal power balance, and will and mike swap between DMing. but with eddie? he’s the dm but it goes beyond that, he uses his position as DM to exert power over other members even outside of the context of DND. like there’s a reason, narratively, why hellfire has such strict rules and why it’s not framed as an even balance the way that the party’s dnd sessions are (ie the whole party sits at the same square table whereas in hellfire eddie sits at the head of a long, uneven table. even though the party’s dms sit at the table, there’s no head of the table to sit at, they’re on equal footing) and why eddie treats it like an exclusive club when he first meets erica despite the fact that it’s supposedly supposed to be an anti-conformity club for outcasts: and the reason is because it’s not actually an anti-conformity club for outcasts, rather, it’s eddie’s attempt to exert his own form on conformity onto people. Mike has gone from conforming to Ted’s standards to conforming to Eddie’s in many ways. i think eddie is a great and fascinating character! but he’s also a hypocrite! which is frankly actually a large part of what fascinates me about him! 

[halfblood-princes-crown]

I just saw this post and now I have a fresh theory on what the snaters' (or at least this specific snater's) problem is: they can't read through the lines and need to have shit be spelled out to them in fat bold letters!

Op be like: if I wrote HP I would make him do this and that, and I'm there thinking: BUT HE DID! IT JUST WASN'T EXPLICITLY WRITTEN 'CAUSE THAT'S THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF MYSTERY NOVELS! IF THE AUTHOR SPELLED EVERYTHING OUT FOR YOU WHERE' D BE THE MYSTERY IN THAT???

Someone once said HP aren't children's books. They are mystery books disguised as children's books. Thing is, some people seem to expect them to be children's books. And they pick them up because an oversimplistic children's book is what they want to read. And then they get mad because it doesn't live up to their expectations.

Thinking about it, it all sheds a new light on the "James grew up and Snape didn't" argument. James is SAID to have grown up, Snape's growth can be ascertained through his ACTIONS in the story. And since snaters are clearly so thick as to need to be TOLD THINGS EXPLICITLY in order for the said things to sink in, it is only logical they would pick up on James' presumed growth instead of Snape's actual and very papaple one for all those those who possess minimal reading-comprehension skills

Ok, yep. That makes SO MUCH sense…

Now that it’s put into this perspective I understand the problem….most Snaters skipped school during the lessons about context clues and reading comprehension

I’ll never fully understand how you can pick up a Harry Potter book and think that it’s for kids…just because it has wizards and magic in it

That persons post pissed me off for some reason (not for some reason, I know the reason). Like not only are you wrong and basing your views off of a lack of comprehending context clues, but you’re in the comments defending an anti Semitic comparison you made…

Wow…That’s embarrassing for them

Anyways, THANK YOU for the theory update! I was excited to see an ask from you!

[dormienschas]

I think David and the pack have a right to be mad about the Quinn thing but honestly I'm kind of on Darlins side just because if they're gone and the pack isn't looking for Quinn he doesn't really have any reason to attack them? Quinn's MO seems to be going after unempowered people who can't defend themselves and hiding around/living nomadically to avoid getting too much on anyone's radar, so him purposely going after the most powerful wolf pack in Dahlia would be super bold just to send a message to Darlin who isn't even there to see it? Especially since based on the timeline they probably didn't even meet Babe or Angel or at least didn't know them very well before they were gone. Plus if he thought they were estranged from their pack he would really have no reason to target them because what would be the point- but if the Shaw pack starts investigating him and now it seems like he's going to have to fight these wolves no matter what, now maybe he has the justification to attack first and get the drop on them and teach them a lesson about leaving him alone the same way he did Darlin

I do agree Darlin should have still told the pack but I do also sort of think their reasoning for not doing it was kind of correct

I think my reasoning is that Quinn is a ticking time bomb. We don't know what exactly his motives are. Like "Is he doing this just because or does he have a reason?" kind of motives.

And if Quinn wanted to get Darlin back into Dahlia while they were healing, Quinn could have went after the pack to get Darlin's attention amd be like "Get your ass back here little wolfie. We have unfinished bsuiness." And if not the pack, he could have found that same unempowered person he attacked before in Dahlia while Darlin is still up in Washington.

My main issue is the lying. Like we don't what could have happened while Darlin was up in Washington. And if Quinn did start up his whatever the hell he's doing, it could have ended extremely badly because the pack wasn't prepared to handle the safety of others because they didn't know Quinn was still a thing.

Sure Quinn is targeting those who can't defend themselves, but David also said there's older wolves who can't defend themselves...to me, it seems like Quinn is targeting anyone that can't defend themselves. And David didn't specify that Quinn was only targeting the unempowered. I mean, if Quinn wanted to, he could have attacked one of the pack members just because he felt like it.

And now the Kaeton pack is involved and they didn't know Quinn was a thing until Quinn started messing around near their territory.

Quinn is a threat to the whole population and Darlin lied about how "he's captured." You don't just do that Darlin 😭😭😭 I mean Quinn literally could have just gone like "Mmm I feel like getting a little wolf pup. How fun would that be!"...just because he felt like it. It wouldn't have to do with Darlin if he thought they were an outcast. It could have been a "just because it's fun." scenario and it still would have been on Darlin because Darlin told the pack that Quinn was "captured."

But I mean, everybody is able to interpret things on their own because that's how Erik intended it to be. So, if you wanna be on Darlin's side, that's fine! Because I do see your side of things, I just personally can't accept Darlin's actions they did. Some people are more forgiving than others and I'm the latter.

But like I also said, I'm proud that Darlin is fixing it! Doing things to feel like they're part of the pack and helping them out. I love watching people try and get more involved when they weren't in the first place. It's a nice progression that I appreciate. And also because I'm totally not a David kinnie...nope...not at all...hahaha

[friedloverballoon]

It is sad I come here to read your based and opinions and then in comments I see "haha go kys".

I'm not from America but where I live enforces legal punishment law on people who wish death to others publicly. So I am not sure about the USA state laws but even there is no law for it, you fucking lack in humanity and self confidence for wishing a random person this especially when you can't bring a logical reason to defend your argument.

Hope you are doing good bud.

THANK YOU, I never have wrong opinions 💅

For real though, on that infamous post about trans laws, the way that almost none of the people who disagreed with me even had a valid argument (let alone a well-researched or accurate one) really says a lot about the subject and the majority of the people who defend it (and where their priorities are, how mature they are, etc.). Only about 25% of the people who disagreed with me offered actual arguments, and only about half of those arguments came without a bonus weird-ass insult.

As for the legal stuff, if I recall correctly, I think specific types of repeated threats over the internet can fall under stalking by US law, so who knows, I could possibly take this sucker to court and rake in some cash 💵💵💵

And thanks dude, I'm actually doing quite well lately. Don't worry about the hate I receive on here, I have quite the turbulent lifestyle outside of my legendary Tumblr blog. All insults and threats bounce right off, though some of them have made me laugh way too hard because I cannot wrap my mind around how people can get so mad over a post on a website until their brains short out to the point where they absolutely have to respond. Couldn't be me 🥱

[haleigh-sloth]

Hello,

I just found your page and after reading some of your mha posts had a couple things I wanted to ask if that's ok.

1. Since you feel Hawks is not justified because he could have chosen options other than killing Twice, do you think he would have been had he genuinely been made to choose between killing him and saving others? I.e. do you think it's just this killing in particular that was not justified and thus murder, or do you think heroes killing can never be justified, even if in self-defense or defense of others? If we take the "Heroes save people" maxim to its limits, it might be reasonable to argue for a deontological approach to ethics rather than a utilitarian one, so that killing one to save others is not justified because you actively break your code (as opposed to risking not being able to save others, which would be considered a lesser moral wrong under this mindset).

2. This might very well be a stupid question, but if we consider that heroes shouldn't treat others as an it and put them down for the "sake of society", do you feel this ought to extend to AFO too? I really don't mean to use this as a gotcha moment or anything like it, but I feel like if MHA is trying to move away from a punitive justice system in favour of a rehabilitative/restorative one, we ought to consider where people like AFO fall into this system as well. AFO is seemingly entirely unlike any of the other villains in the show, but if we judge that he deserves a different fate for this it also feels like playing into the "Some people just can't be saved" notion that's been perpetuated by hero society. It is of course entirely possible, if not likely, that he'll fall in battle, or that Shigaraki himself will kill him eventually, but I feel like that skirts the issue rather than answer it. As someone who does not seem to show any remorse, desire or even ability to be saved, and in fact feels rather inhuman, what should a reformed society even do with him? Even if we could convincingly argue him to be fundamentally different and thus deserving of punishment, it is much easier for us readers who have more information to make this call, rather than in-universe characters whose judgement will inevitably be based on something less than the full truth. So even if AFO's case in particular was easily answered, it would set a precedent for cases that may appear similar, but in truth be less clear cut. Basically, I believe you feel the villain league deserves another chance because they were victims of their circumstances, and thus not necessarily beyond salvation, because they never knew normality to begin with, but what about those who were not victims, those who by their nature have insurmountable trouble fitting into a peaceful society? Perhaps it's just my mistaken assumption that such people exist and I'm reading AFO wrong, or perhaps it's the opposite and I'm giving people like AFO undue consideration, or perhaps my assumption that AFO ought to be treated as a person rather than a carocature, a symbol, is flawed to begin with, but I just really don't think a manga that wants to argue that villains are people too should go "but here's THIS vile piece of shit, let's kill him!". Am I making sense here?

3. On another note, what do you think of Endeavor's recent speech and general recent development? I've seen some people who were upset by his "Would it fix everything if we showed you our tears" line, but rather than him being dismissive or callous I just see it as him awkwardly saying that he doesn't think anything other than actions can help him atone for what he did. He's still got a lot to work through, but him recognizing that he's got something to atone for and freely talking about what he did to his family is, as I find, certainly a huge step in the right direction.

WHOO hey! Sorry for taking a while to respond. You gave me some really well thought-out questions and I wanted to return the favor with well thought-out answers. Also I was heckin busy yesterday when you sent this. So, here we go:

To answer this question about Hawks, I first need to clarify what it means to be a hero in the eyes of the story that is BNHA:

This honestly doesn’t even make a dent in the amount of panels in BNHA that reiterate time and time again that heroes SAVE people, but I don’t feel like I should have to spend too much time looking for them, these I used above should suffice. The one with baby Midoriya and baby Tenko doesn’t even have any words in the panel, and it’s still powerful enough to get the message across. And make me cry.

Almost every story has its own “heroes” in it. And every story’s definition of a hero is different. In Marvel and DC superhero comics and movies, the heroes usually end up killing the villains, yes? I can’t say I’m familiar with these stories because they aren’t interesting to me in the slightest, but from the ones I HAVE seen, the final boss at the end dies. But all of the heroes get to keep their title of “hero”. That’s not really the standard we have in BNHA.

“Do you think it's just this killing in particular that was not justified and thus murder, or do you think heroes killing can never be justified, even if in self-defense or defense of others?”

So this is a fair point and I feel that the best way to answer this is by asking what you consider self defense? Say Hawks is at home mad chillin and not prepared for a fight in the slightest, and somebody breaks into his house and starts trying to hurt/kill him. He’s unprepared and at this point just trying to keep himself alive. If he ends up killing the guy, is he wrong? In my opinion, no. In real life this happens to people, and they aren’t considered murderers, as they shouldn’t be. To me, self defense is a situation where:

It’s either you or me. It’s one or the other.

I think it’s fair to say what happened with Hawks and Twice was absolutely NOT self defense. I’m not going to go into detail about how deciding to kill Twice was absolutely 100% premeditated, because there’s a wonderful post by someone else that already explains that in great detail here. But I’ll end this thought by saying that Hawks was not committing an act of self defense.

Nothing about this says “self-defense” to me.

“If we take the "Heroes save people" maxim to its limits, it might be reasonable to argue for a deontological approach to ethics rather than a utilitarian one, so that killing one to save others is not justified because you actively break your code (as opposed to risking not being able to save others, which would be considered a lesser moral wrong under this mindset).”

To make it simple for some people to understand these terms:

“Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on OUTCOMES.“ In a nutshell, utilitarian ethics means you make a decision based on how it will affect everything else.

“In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.” In a nutshell, deontological ethics means you make a decision based on whether it follows rules or not.

So this is a complicated question, and my answer to this is....both? Throughout BNHA we’ve had this dilemma over and over again:

Break the rules and save the day? Or follow the rules and possibly suffer the consequences? Well, BNHA just says “Yes” lol. Do both. Break the rules and save the day. Make a decision based on the consequences of said decision, but also try to follow the rules as best as you can. Even in reality, people do this to get through life. You really can’t live life under a strict utilitarian approach or a strict deontological approach. If Midoriya hadn’t persisted against his classmates and the law to go save Bakugo, he WOULD have gotten kidnapped AGAIN. They were actively trying to take him with them. If Midoriya didn’t break the rules to save Kota, Kota would have straight up DIED. Muscular was actively trying to kill Kota, not to mention Kota had zero ways of defending himself. But here’s where I don’t think this is a fair comparison:

Hawks claims his killing of Twice was to save others. I don’t completely disagree with this logic, if the situation was more dire and dangerous for Hawks. The league was taking peoples’ lives. Somebody had to do something. The problem is that Twice was RUNNING AWAY when Hawks killed him. Twice wasn’t fighting Hawks back, he wasn’t endangering Hawks himself. Hawks stabbed him in the back. AND Hawks had Dabi to worry about, who was actively trying to attack Hawks. But Hawks chose to murder Twice instead of fending off Dabi. And if you refer back to the post I linked above about how it was a premeditated decision to kill Twice, you’ll see that Hawks had the capability of knocking Twice unconscious. He should have done this from the get go. And honestly? There are other heroes who could have captured Twice. There SHOULD have been other heroes to capture Twice. If Hawks was the only hope for the heroes in that war then jeez, the heroes suck at their jobs.

So TLDR for this question: Hawks’s circumstances were not drastic enough for him to be justified in killing Twice. As I said above, self-defense is one thing, where yes I could understand how if a life is lost while defending oneself is probably inevitable in some cases. But this wasn’t self defense. Twice was running away. Hawks should also be able to rely on his hero comrades to help him out.

Instead Hawks chose to be law-enforcement, judge, and executioner all in one moment.

I hope this answers your question? I tried my best. If I misunderstood or missed a talking point, feel free to shoot me a message or another ask.

Next question:

Believe me. I have thought about this! What about AFO? He’s human too isn’t he? You have a point. Should the restorative justice system extend to AFO? I would say yes. If I’m going to stick to my guns that the villains deserve restorative justice and not punitive justice, I should be fair and say it should extend to all villains.

The problem is not in the idea of exploring saving AFO, it’s just that there simply isn’t enough time to explore this in the story. If Horikoshi had said “I’m not going anywhere guys! We’re in this for the long haul!” I’d say it’s possible to explore that route. We don’t know anything about AFO except from what we’ve seen on screen, and what we’ve been told by All Might and the other OFA holders. Which still isn’t much to go on. You’re not giving AFO undue consideration. It’s definitely a deserved consideration. There are people in the story (and the real world) who may not be victimized in any way and end up being villains. Do they deserve a chance? I’d say yes. It’s in my nature as a social worker irl to give people the benefit of the doubt and give them a chance to learn. You’re right that in the end, the league being saved and the characters not considering what could have led AFO to villainy is just “skirting around the problem.” And honestly, that’s probably what we’re going to get. I wouldn’t be surprised for the thought to pass in Midoriya’s head. After saving somebody like Shigaraki, who everybody in the story (and many readers) considered to be “too far gone”, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Midoriya entertained the thought for a brief moment. “What could have saved AFO from himself?” So honestly I don’t have an answer to this question that qualifies both sides. I can’t say that AFO is “too far gone” without undermining that fact that I never believed Shigaraki was “too far gone”, simply because we don’t get to decide what “too far gone” is.  All I can say is that in the eyes of the story, there are far too many differences between AFO’s circumstances and Shigaraki’s circumstances to compare the two, and say they deserve the same type of sympathy from us readers.

Truly I have no sympathy for AFO, because the story doesn’t ask for it. The story wants sympathy for Shigaraki, Toga, Touya, Spinner, and even a tiiiiiny bit for Overhaul. It asks for NONE for AFO.

Another post I’ll link here that isn’t by me but by another awesome meta blogger (@hamliet​) is this.

In a nutshell it says:

It’s not that AFO can’t be saved, it’s that he won’t. That’s the best answer I can give to that question honestly.

As for the third question:

That press conference was just...eh. I mean yeah, Endeavor not denying the allegations was good. Not that he really could anyway. It sucks for the rest of his family though. But at the same time Touya deserved his revenge, even though it was at the expense of his siblings and mother. It sucks, it’s a double edged sword because somebody is hurting no matter what was gonna happen. Endeavor was an asshole to that lady but I don’t really care too much. I’m really torn on what I think is going on inside Enji’s head because the Todofam is either extremely dense, or Horikoshi is writing their dialogue extremely vague on purpose to keep reader’s on the edge of their seats regarding what they want to do about Touya. I really don’t know. I’m not thrilled with the way the Todofam plot is being written right now, even though I’m 100% sure Touya is going to get his happy ending. But right now anything to do with the Todofam that isn’t Shoto and Touya just bothers me. I don’t think Enji really understands yet what he has to do for Touya. Yes he recognizes that he has to atone, but he’s not recognizing HOW he has to atone. Right now he’s still stuck in that “I have to be a hero to absolve my crimes against my family” headspace and I don’t think he’s going to get out of that headspace until he comes face to face with his son and realizes that he can’t just fight villains and go home to a happy family that he terrorized for 20 years. He’s going to have to let his family go, let them decide when to let him back in, if they ever do (I think they will just because of the way the story is being written.) As a reader, Enji is just a character that I cannot vibe with, no matter what happens. I definitely appreciate his role in the story. His role is vital to Touya’s saving and redemption. Touya is in my top 3 favorite characters from this series and I’m emotionally invested. So while I appreciated Enji’s role in the story, I don’t like his character or anything to do with him, at least until it comes time to help save his son. Also the trio of Hawks, Best Jeanist, and Enji just gives me major back the blue vibes and I just can’t read their chapters and be in a good mood lol.

Thank you for the ask! I hope I answered everything! This was fun to answer!