#I think I will neglect to post this on twitter.

[snirtsnirkarts]

I’m going to sleep now. Let’s hope I don’t dream about him too.

[daydadahlias]

Hi! Are you okay? Sorry but you haven’t updated on here in a while and I’m worried.

[firelord-frowny]

so bizarreeee to me when businesses don't make certain information easily accessible to its clientele???

like, for a small music store such as (but not limited to) music&arts centers, whyyyy would you not have a clearly stated inclement weather policy on their websites with regard to private lessons?

if your business, say, a restaurant, has to shut down for several weeks renovations or something, WHYYYYYYYYYYYYY would you not stick a sign on the door that says so? WHYYYYY would you not make a quick lil social media post explaining why you're closed and how soon you expect to re-open?? literally howwww much fucking sense does it make to just turn out the lights and shut the door without a single word to any of the people who patronize your business???

are there legit reasons why so many places are content to just leave their customers in the dark like that and make them have to go out of their way to contact the owners/managers/etc and ask wtf is going on, if they care enough to ask?

[bluefuecoco]

undefined

Axel has committed the most heinous crime

Clip from the stream highlights going up on youtube tomorrow!

[link to my youtube here]

[fearmeeeee]

Your artwork is absolutely incredible! Do you have an ig or are willing to get one? If you don’t, don’t feel pressured to because that’s not my intent

Thank you so much!!!!!! I don't have an ig, but i'm not sure I'll make one, because I keep hearing artists say... not the best about it as an art posting site. I also dont know how well it works on desktop, because thats the only thing I use. If I make an account I'll post about it here fist though!

[worldofgoo]

i still sometimes have a lingering habit of trying to categorizing any given behavior as “adhd trait” or “autism trait”. irritating

[sapsolais]

.

[lumineary-arts]

Tumblr, I'm sorry for neglecting you, I need to post art here more often rather than just on Twitter. There are just so many Swap questions I gotta get to! To make it up to y'all I made the most tumblr thing I could think of......... <3

[star-anise]

Ask I got on my sideblog but am answering here:

Hi there! I know you're a therapist and I have a question: I saw some people arguing on Twitter about the impacts of trauma. There was a therapist among them, and they had a masters degree in social work, they post about it often. They say that people who have experienced trauma hurt other people because it benefits them or gives them pleasure, and they are disconnected from empathy and sympathy. That seems wrong, but maybe it's not? That's all, thanks!

Ooof, yeah, that's... complicated. It's technically true, but also frequently used as a lie.

Trigger warning: Child abuse, child grooming, interpersonal violence, trauma (childhood & intergenerational), true crime, totalitarianism

Because basically, that describes MOST humans who decide to hurt other humans on purpose without a strong ulterior motive. That's not a trauma thing, that's a human thing.

I babysit for a family with a 1-year-old and a 3-year-old. When the 1yo does something to upset their older sibling, and that sibling winds up and smacks them, that's the same basic thing. It benefits them (makes 1yo go away), brings them pleasure (having an outlet for their anger is very satisfying), and they're disconnected from empathy (they're often surprised and confused when the 1yo is crying, because they're 3 and THEY feel fine and they don't really understand yet that other people's feelings really exist) or even sympathy (understanding that if you hit someone, they will probably be upset). That's something we adults have to watch out for and intervene in, because empathy and impulse control take time to learn.

But as for where trauma figures into this... how to explain.

There's this old logical puzzle about categories, where you say things like:

All dogs have four legs*

A dog is an animal

And then the catch is that you can't extend that to say

All animals have four legs

*RIP to all the tripods and legless animals that apparently aren't dogs anymore for the purposes of this logic exercise

Animals obviously include fish and millipedes and whales and snakes and jellyfish. The number of legs an animal can have is HIGHLY diverse, and will eventually lead to a debate on what the definition of "leg" is.

So there is this common thing we see:

Some people are much more violent and aggressive than other people

These violent and aggressive people have almost always experienced some form of trauma/abuse/neglect

And the link people are really prone to thinking is:

People who have experienced trauma/abuse/neglect will go on to being violent and aggressive with other people.

This is incorrect. To some degree, I can see why it's widely believed - after all, way more people tune in to learn about a serial killer's abusive childhood than for the more common story, which is survivors of trauma slowly going about their lives in ordinary undramatic ways.

Because the thing is, trauma is REALLY diverse. Humans are inherently varied and a bit chaotic, since we can choose very different ways to live and operate, and trauma splits that variability like a prism turning light into a rainbow. Only about 30% of abused children grow up to be abusive themselves. The other 70% choose very different lives.

And yet. My eternal question is: WHY is this such a meme? Why do so many people with a shitty childhood flinch at the 30% statistic and think, "Is that me? Am I destined to be a monster?" Why does this story have legs, when so many other facts about trauma have way more empirical backing and usefulness and get very little attention?

I submit that there is one group that fucking LOVES the idea that traumatized person equals abuser. One group that pushes it into the discourse, in international media or around the family kitchen table, with great ingenuity and gusto.

Abusers.

They love it for two reasons. The most obvious reason is: It absolves them of their actions. "It wasn't ME who hit you, it was my childhood trauma!" A veritable classic excuse that takes their agency out of the equation. And it really can be hard to tell when it's a good excuse and when it isn't!

Reason two is the more insidious one: It cuts their victim's sense of goodness, worthiness, and moral certainty out from under them.

It's as simple as saying, "Look at how you pushed back at me (when I was abusing you)! You're the REAL abuser here!" It's the heart of what domestic abuse researchers call DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender). It can be that simple, or it can be so complicated and byzantine it makes your head hurt.

I only really got a handle on understanding this thanks to a friend, who said she was okay with me sharing this story if I didn't identify her. I won't go into any unrelated details of her abuse, but for the record, hers is probably the most extreme case of anyone I've personally interacted with, and I used to work as a therapist and in domestic violence shelters. Her dad heinously abused her as a child. He'd also studied psychology in university. I have been trying to fathom how the fuck anyone could do what he did to her for YEARS, and I think I've got a few viabletheories.

So. She was an ordinary child, bright, warmhearted, well-behaved, and a bit autistic. A bit more naive and trusting than your average preschooler. I imagine that from his perspective, there was the convenient benefit that he often had unrestricted access to her, and he could relatively easily overpower and manipulate her.

But she had one serious downside: If anyone ever found out what he was doing to her, they would go fucking apeshit. She wasn't really prone to lying or acting out, so people would treat her as a fairly credible reporter; several other adults found her she was lovable, innocent, and endearing; and what he wanted to do to her was, I repeat, heinous.

So while he abused her, one of the things he said was: "I'm doing this because I was abused as a child. That's how it works. All abusers come from abuse. There are statistics proving it. This means you're an abuser too. See what society thinks about child abusers? That's what people will think about you, if they know that you've been abused."

And she was, you know, a child, not someone who studied psych research. He was her dad. So she believed him.

She thought that he was using his adult brain to correctly assess the truth about her as a person, for purely objective reasons. The way you'd try to teach a kid who talks with their mouth full about table manners. It's been a couple decades now, but she is still very slowly chipping away at her core belief that she is inherently awful and only her father recognized the truth about her.

Sometimes when we talk about it I have to bite my tongue because I'm sitting here trying to figure out what the fuck was going on with him, an adult man who wanted to abuse her because he'd really enjoy it. I think about him trying to figure out how to manipulate an innocent child into accepting being abused, and minimize the risk that he'd go to jail for it. And although I hate his everloving guts, I'm almost a bit impressed at his level of machiavellian audacity, to come up with a line that was SUCH hot bullshit that people have devoted their entire careers into proving it false, and yet, because it hit exactly the right psychological issue at exactly the right psychological stage and his intended victim was so trusting, he could get her to believe him enough to turn that lie into her core identity.

Praise be to G-d and Criminal Minds, he did not, in the end, get away with it. She got enough courage to tell people, and get free of him. And she is not, in fact, a horrible abusive person.

But I think what he did so very brazenly is what a lot of abusers do, in more disguised and indirect ways. Probably partly because it really helps, when abusing people, not to treat them like human beings with their own thoughts and feelings, but if one must posit that they have something going on between their ears, it's easiest to assume that everyone else responds to trauma with aggression and abuse. After all, considering the possibility that someone like them could choose not to be abusive takes all the fun and plausible deniability out of the whole affair.

But now I see echoes of that "my victims are just as bad as I am" tactic all over the place. I honestly think it's a very similar mechanism that Hannah Arendt pointed out in The Origins of Totalitarianism. She observes that violent totalitarian regimes routinely accuse their intended victims of the very act they intend to commit themselves, to justify a "retaliation" that's actually just aggression. Think claiming "Our opponents are rigging this election" as an excuse to rig an election in the opposite direction.)

To sum up: You're human. Humans can do good and bad things. It's not necessarily good to completely forswear anything violent or angry in you, but to come up with a framework of how to be assertive and get your needs met in an ethical fashion. There are times it is appropriate and even necessary to escape or fight against somebody else's will.

On the other hand, If find yourself inflicting pain on other people on a regular basis, get some support and take a good hard look at your life choices. Sometimes it's hard to figure out how to solve problems in your life without violence or aggression, and you might need some help with that. Maybe talk to a counsellor or learn anger management skills.

But in no way is it predestined, inherent, implicit, or doomed, that your experiences and brain wiring make you violent or evil. You always have the choice to define yourself beyond what was done to you.

[respectthepetty]

The Colors Mean Things!

I don't have Twitter, so thanks @firstkanaphans, @heretherebedork, @lukaherehelp, @sammie-lightwood-bane, @pots-and-pans-excite-me, and the Anons who woke me up with the best news that GMMTV decided to take pity on me and confirmed the colors of the The Trainee characters!

I love the Tumblr hype team for instantly thinking of me, and I love that the text also includes the reasoning for their colors!

Jane - (Dark) Blue Boy (intelligent, loyal, reliable)

When working, he is committed, dependable, and sharp about his work, which shows he cares about his job (more than caring about relationships).

Ryan - Green Guy (chill, generous, balancing)

Compromises in a group of friends. Doesn't know if he is talented because he doesn't have a passion or ambition, but focuses on doing the job in front of him as best as he can.

Pie - Red Rascal (passionate, spontaneous, dominant)

Determined, strong, ambitious, perfectionist

Pah - Yellow/Orange Oddity (optimistic, creative, communicative)

Bright, cheerful, always moving, colorful, and always supporting his fellow interns.

Judy - Black Brooder (mysterious, seductive, protective, and white signifies perfection)

AE's most professional seems trustworthy to customers, and looks stylish as the face of the company.

Mee - Pink Person (emotional, playful, assertive)

Bright, lively, and gives importance to love as a priority.

And Tae is a Brown Boy (predictable, honest, wise)

Has fun only with things that interest him to the point of neglecting the people around him. Gives importance to work as a priority.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind some of the anons in my inbox and the bold people in the comments of some of my posts that I'm petty, and I remember these exact moments when shows confirm the colors just so I can hurl them at non-believers who argue with me that the colors don't mean things and I'm thinking too deep.

I'm a Leo born in the Year of the Dragon, so I don't lack confidence, but it's always nice to be right!

[theweeklydiscourse]

Someone on twitter was expressing their disappointment about how Katara ended up becoming the healer she never wanted to become in Legend of Korra and got absolutely piled on for it.

“She decided to settle down!”

“Are you saying that being a healer is BAD? Why are you looking down on it?”

“She had other responsibilities to attend to, like her grandchildren and community! She would’ve been too busy to fight”

“She was too fragile! She already achieved world peace, what more do you want from her?!”

These are some of the comments I saw people making about that post. I even saw someone citing the comics as an example of Katara doing more than just healing in her old age. It was a scene of her training young Korra and I though it was really sweet but like…if only they actually included that scene in the show. I just feel like we should have to use the comics as supplementary material to cover the flaws in Legend of Korra and should be able to judge it on its own merit.

The comics don’t really matter to me, because the most visible and relevant parts of the story are depicted in the ACTUAL animated series. If we are critiquing the way LOK depicted Katara, we shouldn’t have to be weighed down by dozens of whataboutisms that don’t understand the difference between a watsonian and doylist critique.

Here’s one example:

These are real people, THESE ARE REAL-LIFE ACTORS! These examples are not animated characters that exist in a supernatural world, the characters in ATLA are not governed by reality in the way that these real-life actors are. Furthermore, aging seems to be such an insurmountable obstacle for Katara…but somehow the fact that Toph and Zuko were throwing down well into their 80s is totally plausible.

But these kinds of fans will freak out over the most basic criticism of the text. They can’t handle that questioning it leads to realizing the broader thematic implications of neglecting Katara’s character and ignoring her in the story.

They bring up the comics but I just don’t accept that as proof of coherent storytelling. Like thank you for the textual example! But what if I don’t accept the text? What if I think the text is wrong and has sexist undertones?

[sreegs]

Tumblr users like to build up a lot of myths about this site that still get thrown around like they're fact, but I think the biggest myth they've convinced themselves is true is that the site is unprofitable because of the users.

Tumblr's unprofitable because its model doesn't fly under the current state of internet advertising. It's also had a string of owners, leadership, and people in charge of coming up with ideas for Tumblr that don't know what they have and would be damned if they knew what to do with it. You can't make money on social media unless you collect worthwhile info from users to sell to advertisers. You also don't make money on social media by copying existing features.

Tumblr's core prop, which they has somehow survived Yahoo, Verizon, and now Automattic, is anonymity. You can't sell that information that you don't collect. Outside of that, Tumblr's a long-form blogging platform which flies in the face of short-form attention-grabbing content like Tiktok and Twitter.

The people who have been in charge of making decisions at Tumblr have never known what to do with it. A lot of them just copied other platforms' features. It got really frustrating working there, being forced to make something you knew would just languish for months before being left to rot or, hopefully, mercifully, be removed.

Meanwhile site improvements were neglected because they don't make a quick buck. This was the main reason I quit, because I just gave up on trying to make the place better only to be forced into adding a new feature that no one wants to use.

Case in point, Tumblr live. I can assure you that none of the engineers or the people who run the Staff blog, or anyone else who does actual work work at Tumblr, wanted to support it. It's not even the first time Tumblr had live video.

The thing is, though, I'm not sure that just improving the site without adding anything new would lead to long term success anyways. You need a steady stream of new users to replace the old. It's also incredibly expensive to run a social media site that hosts images and video. AND you have to moderate it, which is expensive and difficult. Even if Tumblr just made all these things better, I'm not convinced it would keep the site alive much longer. Tumblr's too expensive to maintain on this model that doesn't make enough money from advertising, and it's too expensive to be maintained on user donations.

Anyways, the point is, the Tumblr users that like to proudly declare they have the power to make this site lose money are actually helping the site make money by posting and using the site. Even if you have an ad-blocker never pay for merch or whatever, your presence and activity here adds to Tumblr's usership statistics, which they use to court more advertisers. The people who have actually been keeping this site unprofitable are the people who own it and the decision makers who dictate what the next feature will be.

[project-sekai-facts]

hi… is it alright if i can ask u ur opinion on whether you think that tsukasa was neglected (albeit unintentionally) or not… u dont need to answer this its fine really😭 i just find reading analysis or other ppls opinions especially abt tsukasas pysche interesting😓i see alot of diff opinions and im no tsukasa expert, tho i really enjoy the facts and analyses u post on here^^

ah, is this because people have been arguing about it on twitter again?

he kinda was it's made pretty clear in Dazzling. BUT it was NOT intentional. Saki was seriously ill and constantly in and out of hospital, so their parents obviously had to dedicate more time to her. he doesn't blame them for that, and he doesn't blame saki. he was well aware of the fact that their parents had to spend more time taking care of her, and wanted the best for her.

(TL by Tsukasa's #3 Fan on YT)

as I said Dazzling makes it clear though that the way his parents dealt with the situation specifically in regards to him was not the best way that they could have handled it. he's seemingly home alone (no babysitter is shown or mentioned) when he was seven because his parents were often either at work or the hospital. it's also important to note though, that as much as he was lonely he knew saki had it worse, because at least in his case, he could still see his friends at school every day and lived in the same house as his parents. He was lonely because he didn't have his sister, Saki was lonely because she didn't have anyone. And also just because of the person he is, he decided not to dwell on the negative feelings.

However I will add, I do think the lack babysitters and leaving your kid alone at home and responsible for themself at a fairly young age is more common in Japanese culture than in a lot of western countries. So by those standards, I dunno if you really wanna call it neglect or not.

Regardless, Tsukasa and Saki both have trauma over what happened in their childhood and it can and does coexist. What’s with this fandom and making everything one or the other?

[swordfright]

what are your logistical questions about the guard dog au?

Ohhhh boyyy. Well. First of all I'm sorry it took me like a month to answer this, I got busy.

I wanna start by saying I wasn't around when Guard Dog AU was created, it was before my time (just barely) but I have read dozens of fics with this premise so bear in mind that I thiiiink I have a pretty solid understanding of how GD is supposed to work?? But I could be wrong about some details, in which case please feel free to correct me! Also, I wouldn't normally poke holes in someone's AU because at the end of the day, AUs are supposed to be fun fantasy what-if scenarios and not airtight canon-compliant thought experiments. The only reason I feel comfortable doing it with Guard Dog is because, from what I can tell, this AU wasn't created by any one specific person, it just sort of manifested on twitter in like 2021 and now there are literally hundreds of pieces of fan content about it. What I'm saying is, Guard Dog is The People's AU and that's the only reason I don't feel weird answering this ask.

Yeah, so. My logistical questions are as follows:

What's Sam's motivation for letting Q borrow Dream?

When in the timeline is this taking place? (because that affects EVERYTHING)

What threat is Dream purportedly guarding Las Nevadas from?

How does Dream's presence change the preexisting dynamic in Las Nevadas?

What is Quackity actually getting out of this?

Who does or doesn't have the revive book at this point?

I'll try to address these as neatly as I can. So, my understanding of the premise: Quackity somehow gets Sam to agree to let Dream out of the prison so he can live out the remainder (or some unspecified portion?) of his life sentence acting as security for LN. In some variants it seems like this is happening after Dream gives up the revive book, but in other variants that's not the case or it's left unclear. There are a couple points at which this feels implausible/OOC, namely:

1.) Sam would never let Dream out, even on parole. He does not want Dream under anyone else's watch. He wants Dream in Pandora at all costs. You cannot convince me he would just let someone borrow the prisoner for a bit, for any reason - especially not Quackity, who imo Sam probably sees as a greater threat to his authority as warden than almost anyone. Think about it: aside from Sam, Q has probably had the most consistent contact with the prisoner during his incarceration; Q's violence and general temperament mean that Sam likely knows Q killing Dream is a possibility, and that without the warden's supervision this could very well happen. Sam obviously isn't concerned for Dream's wellbeing, but he does want his prisoner alive because otherwise he's not a prisoner and Sam's not a warden. So yeah. "Just me and him" line etc etc. Dream ain't never gettin' outta there if Sam has anything to say about it.

2.) What is Dream actually capable of contributing to LN? In other words, would initiating Guard Dog actually pay off for Quackity in tangible ways? It depends on where in the timeline we are. If this is happening post-torture era or even mid-torture era, Dream is likely physically incapable of performing the feats of combat he was capable of prior to prison. Hell, even if Guard Dog era is happening instead of the torture era, Dream has still been in prison for a while and is probably already experiencing the disabling effects of prolonged malnutrition and neglect. So if Dream is known for PVP and his PVP skills took a severe blow recently, then what use is he as a security guard? Which brings us to the next question...

3.) What threat is Dream even guarding LN from? Quackity's foremost enemy is Technoblade, who has largely peace'd-out between Doomsday and Jailbreak. Q is evidently not eager to reignite a direct conflict with Techno because he got his ass handed to him last time. Also, he's aware that Techno and Dream are allies, so why would he put Dream in a place that's easier to rescue Dream from than Pandora? You could argue that maybe by publicly turning Dream into a glorified slave laborer Q is indirectly flaunting his power (the power of ownership) in Techno's face, but I don't see this as terribly likely given that (based on some of the visitation dialogue) Q misunderstands the nature of Dream and Techno's relationship. Critically, he doesn't seem to realize that they are comrades in addition to allies. And I think flaunting ownership of Dream would only make sense if you thought you were really hurting Techno in the process - Quackity just doesn't seem to have picked up on the fact that this is even a possibility. Based on all this, the enemy Dream is supposed to be fending off probably isn't Techno, so who is it? Las Nevadas is pretty much a neutral state. Q has people he doesn't like, but his list of Actual Real Enemies is surprisingly short. The population of the server is also comically small, so like...intruders? What intruders??? It's not as if Q really has to worry about strangers breaking in and robbing him or something, which is usually what guard dogs are for. My current answer to this question is that the threat would have to be the Egg. Possession by the Egg can turn people you know into strangers, and the entity that is the Egg can travel/infiltrate new spaces by way of the vines. Also, this conveniently answers the sub-question of "what threat can Dream defend LN against that the actual members of LN couldn't?" If you suddenly have to worry about contamination, it makes sense that you would send someone disposable to deal with the contaminant - not your own friends or employees. Speaking of which...

4.) Dream's presence in LN would change the faction's dynamic and Quackity is sooo poorly equipped to navigate that. Quackity's whole shtick is that he's charismatic because he can't be strong. He's volatile, conniving, violent, insecure, hedonistic, profit-motivated and has poor impulse control, but he's also able to project confidence and affability in ways that have been advantageous to him. There are two sides to Quackity and he seemingly likes to keep them separate. If Guard Dog is happening after the torture arc, then Quackity is used to showing the worst aspects of his personality only around Dream. In Pandora, he's a torturer; in Las Nevadas, he's a leader. So what happens when those two places effectively become the same place? If LN is Dream's new prison, how is Quackity supposed to act there? Sure, he's not particularly kind and caring when dealing with his staff (most of them were recruited via intimidation, after all) but they've never seen the side of him that Dream has seen. How is he supposed to maintain that authority over Dream while continuing to be the version of himself that Fundy and Purple and Foolish and co. know? Quackity talks a big game about (and makes gestures toward) not caring that people know about the torture, but he obviously does have reservations about it. When Wilbur asks him about visiting, he dodges around the question. When he discourages Foolish from breaking in, he's weird and cagey about it even though he knows he needs to come clean. When Tommy confronts him about the torture directly, he says "Don't ever say that, not even as a joke." He's defensive. This is another one of Q's hilarious contradictions: he wants to enjoy the benefits of being known as a dangerous person without the downsides of people being actually scared of him or finding him repulsive. He wants to have his cake and eat it too, and Dream's presence in Las Nevadas puts that impulse in jeopardy. There's a big difference between people suspecting you may have done some torture vs people actually witnessing that torture firsthand, or even seeing its aftereffects. Not to mention, there are now other people for Dream to interact with besides Sam, Q, and the prison guards! That changes things, even if Dream isn't allowed to speak to them directly. In Pandora, Bad and Ant had one job, which was to keep the prison running and keep Dream inside it - that's not the case with the LN crew. These people have shit to do! Foolish is building Quackity a replica of the Eiffel Tower, he doesn't have the time or interest to be a prison guard. I could go on but you get my drift. Things would get so weird so fast.

5.) The revive book complicates all of this. If Dream actually did give up the book and Sam understood how to use it, I could be convinced that maybe he would let Quackity borrow Dream for a bit - because hey, if he kills Dream then Sam can just revive him! However, I don't feel confident saying that Q wouldn't just kill Dream immediately after getting the book. We know Q enjoys torturing Dream, but we also know that he seemingly gets bored of it after a while. We also know he has at least some level of concern for propriety/his own rep, so he does have plausible reasons to just straight-up kill him after getting the book. Like, he got what he wanted (necromancy knowledge + a fun 3 months of recreational activity) and if he kills Dream then that's one less person to potentially spread word of Q's uhhhh proclivities around the server - which, again, he paradoxically does seem to care about. Even if Q's plan was to relocate Dream to LN to better access to his fave chew toy and never intended to kill Dream, would Sam believe that?? Q can't directly go against the warden's orders when he's visiting Pandora because that would be stupid and dangerous, but in Las Nevadas? Hm. I think Sam may see Guard Dog as an attempt on Q's part to move the prisoner to a location fully under Q's control so that he can kill Dream without risking retaliation from the warden. Basically, I think this au only has a chance to work in a scenario where Dream has given up the revive book to Sam, but not to Quackity. Because otherwise, Sam just wouldn't let him go. Quackity does want the revive book, but moreso he enjoys torturing Dream, so I do find it semi-plausible that Q would initiate Guard Dog even if he didn't have the book yet.

Ummmm so yeah! These are my questions and thoughts about Guard Dog! i think it's a really fun AU with a lot of potential, but there are kinks in the premise (pun intended) that I find it difficult to wrap my head around. anyway please talk to me about this because I think about it all the time and I wanna hear some other folks' takes too.

[hop-a-lot]

Mamas Boy Saxton Hale is so real to me because I can in no universe imagine Saxton and Bilious getting along well. If I may go off on my own personal headcanons…

Bilious actually thought Saxton was TOO WEAK as a child, which was only made “worse” by him being so close to his mother.

So now as an adult, Saxton has absolutely ZERO relationship with Bilious (if he’s still alive lol) meanwhile he’s still extremely close with his mother.

Sorry I have a lot of thoughts about Saxton 😇

Bilious thought Saxton was too weak since he is *his son*, there might be pressure and expectation that put upon on him so that he can take Bilious' place. I feel like Bilious is strict in raising his own child that he might be neglecting the sentiment that a child should receive. The lack of words of encouragement from his father when he was dealing with failures during his growth, made him lean towards his mother, who was more caring and warm, accepting Saxton for who he was.

I like to think this is one of few reasons why Saxton is more empathetic to children and wiling dive himself in teaching youngsters to be resourceful, establish his own girl scout troop 'Saxtonettes' and some sort (apart from teaching them about hippie assault etc etc.)

I would say Saxton's relationship with his dad is..awkward, with some age speculation that people (I'm referencing one twitter post made by @/dinoburger and I must give credit for that) made about the Hale's family, even when Saxton finally inherits Mann Co, he was in his late 20-ish and his dad was in late 70...and it was suggested that he should have taken his dad's place when Bilious offered Saxton the opportunity to run the family business, but he didn't take over sooner as he was still in-merge in hunting-romance with Margaret. Though with all that being said, what made him decide to take over the company? He choose Mann Co over his lover, if not for the possibility of doing it for his father's sake, then what else could have motivated him to take over the company?

[bravedanganronpa]

Hi there. (UPDATE POST)

I'm quite sorry for neglecting this blog. I am most definitely not dead, just a while ago I had moved onto mainly posting updates via the bird app and YT Community Posts because it was a lot easier for me to update there for some reason. (Maybe because it felt like I had to make formal posts here on tumblr due to its format? Like this one?) But I am still greatly sorry for neglecting my audience on Tumblr, which I know is how a lot discovered my project (and who i hope are still around... haha...) So yes, it's been a few years since the prologue, and I am very sorry 'bout that. I had a lot going on in my personal life that slowed stuff down as I am the only one working on the production of art/editing/scripting besides the VAs and my proofreader(s), so when I slow down, everything does.

Here's an update for those not following me on other avenues:

By this point, the prologue sprites are quite some years old and not up to my current standards, as well as being really low resolution so it was obvious when I blew them up. I also played RAINCODE and Komatsuzaki's new style with the rimlighting inspired me and made me jealous and so In order to satisfy my own creative needs and to give these characters the best I think I can do I made the executive decision to start a whole castwide sprite revamp.

Here's an example. If you are following me on my other channels you will know that I am almost done with the full revamp sets with only a few characters left to fully finish all their edits. I will be slowly migrating most of the update posts/art I have been doing to here as well.

I hope for the people who have patiently waited and are still interested to please allow me some more time to make CH1 the best it possibly can be.

If you want to, please consider checking either my youtube community tab or my twitter at twitter.com/gitarooMain for more frequent updates, but I will try my best to update here more frequently.