#TW: trauma discussion

[shrimplymoray]

Neurodivergent, traumas and of sorts headcanons for creepypasta

Why? cuz obviously a bunch of traumatized psychos who live in a manor together can't not be neurodivergent and/or mentally ill in some way.

part 1 of some. idk when i'll make more but i like these.

feat. Jeff the Killer, Homicidal Liu + Sully, Jane the Killer and Ticci Toby

TW: Trauma discussion, Child abuse, PTSD discussion.

Jeff the Killer

Jeff and Liu grew up in a heavily catholic family, so you can imagine for a very emo and punk kid like Jeff it was hard to deal with.

Jeff, in my au, has Bipolar disorder, beside anger issues, and due to his family (excluding Liu) belief it was "the devil doing this to their son", he is neglected any sort of mental help.

Due to this religious trauma of being dragged to churches and being treated with physical violence for his likings and attitude, Jeff never learned a good coping mechanism, and resorts to violence to relief himself from his negative emotions.

When he is in a specially depressive episode, he tends to isolate himself and do the bare minimum to be alive.

But on his maniac episodes, he tends to be extra aggressive and violent. It was in one of those that he did his first killing spree.

Homicidal Liu and Sully

Like i said, Liu and Jeff grew up in a very catholic family. While Jeff's likings collided a lot with their parent's beliefs, Liu's were more accepted, albeit reluctantly.

Their parents had very high expectations of Liu, and whenever Liu didn't meet those, he was phisically punished.

Liu, was very distant from both of his parent's, due to fear of them, and he also didn't have many friends due to the excessive times his family moved in and out of cities.

Liu due to the physical abuse, reclusiveness and lack of attachment to anyone, including Jeff on his earlier years of life developed DID.

He only learned about DID, after Jeff's attack, when he was 15, though.

Besides DID, and him meeting with Sully, his protector, Liu also has heavy insomnia issues and PTSD from beds. Due to that he has a coffee addiction.

Sully, after being split, held a trauma holder role on the system. He grew very angry at Liu's parents, and slowly but surelly started having a more protector role, not only for Liu but, at the time, for Jeff.

After Jeff's attack, Sully grew even more bitter and split himself again, his trauma holder role staying with one part and himself, Sully, staying as a protector. That's when Liu noticed how sociopathic Sully grew.

Jane the Killer / Jane Arkensaw

Jane, before the Jeff incident, was completely normal. The max she had was one or other little insecurities with her appearance, but she had a safe and healthy childhood and family.

She was shy, but nothing that would be deemed worrysome.

After what Jeff did, whoever, her insecurities with her appearance ran out of the roof.

She always covers as much of her body as she can, too worried about anyone seeing her burnt scars and almost leathery skin.

She has an immense hate for Jeff, obviously, but she is extremely empathic with the ones that got hurt by him, including inside the manor by some reason and other people who were hunting him down, like Sully for example.

After her kidnapping, and even before that, after Jeff's burning alive, she grew a extreme anxiety disorder, and regularly does trades with Ann to get medication for it without having to notice Slenderman or the proxies.

She has heavy traumas of kidnapping, torture and tends to have panic attacks when assigned something like that.

Ticci Toby

Toby, of course, has Tourette's syndrome, as stated by his killer name.

Though in this au, Toby's main motor tics are more concentrated on his face, like multiple repeated blinking. Other tics he has is jerking his head to the left, stomping his feet, and turning his eyes around.

On the vocal tics category, he mainly ends up repeating sounds, while rarely he may repeat a word or whistle.

He also has CIPA, and that is what made him be so enthranced by fire since a young age. He didn't feel the burnt or the hurt, he only saw the pretty colour of fire.

Toby has some heavy trauma of cars, which results in most of his missions he walking to his victims. He only accepts entering on a car if another proxy is the one driving, and he can't be on the front.

Toby also has heavy trauma of drunk people, so most times on the comemorations inside the manor, he will stay in his room or outside putting something on fire.

He copes with most of his traumas and fears and honestly anything he can by putting stuff on fire or throwing stuff at people and getting away with it by being a proxy.

Happyness is in the little things <3/j

Toby also has ADHD, with an emphasys on the hiperactive.

He has trouble remembering stuff that are not written down, so if you hear an alarm going off in the middle of the night, it's probably Toby trying to remember something.

i'mma stop here because i got tired lol but this was fun.

[kumasakka]

a little reminder because no one talks ENOUGH about this matter. writing about dark romance, incest, minors having literally sex, intense stalker shit, rape etc. is actuall very concerning. that’s (I’m sorry) fucked up. and in my opinion, that’s something that shouldn’t even get supported AND DEF NOT PUBLISHED HERE OR ELSEWHERE.

“I do not support this—“ then don’t write this and keep ur nasty, freaky fantasies for yourself.

“don’t like, don’t read—“ bro no. this is just fucked up. you shouldn’t let those things slide. to me, it just seems like you’re defending this stuff.

“oh but—“ NO. GET HELP, I’M SORRY. BUT THIS IS NOT OKAY.

especially something like rape. bro. do you realize how many people experience something horrible like this? this isn’t something you should fantasise about. it’s absolutely disgusting and terrifying, no one should experience this and no one should wish for smth like this. imagine being a victim and then reading comments about “oh how I wish to get raped by that character/that person”.

absolutely hate it when writers make some mistakes and it’s like — a trivial matter — but I still see some people writing hate comments. as if making mistakes aren’t normal? shove up those disrespectful, rude comments into your mouth please and thank you. this is what I would call “don’t like, don’t read” if you don’t like the story then don’t read it. go hate on things like dark romance or incest or IDK.

edited: I would like to apologize on my part for being insightful towards those people who use it to cope with their trauma. I’m sorry! stay safe and strong please ❤️

again: I won’t answer any asks anymore or anything because I’m tired of people telling me the same thing. like — I understand that one half of the people who disagree with me because they are explaining their point of view properly, but I will NOT understand the other half who don’t explain it properly enough. I guess that’s on me though.

[teapetal44]

TW: ABUSE, CHILD ABUSE

“He wants to air this dirty laundry to the world does he…? Dabi, you fiend…you’ve been waiting for this moment…when they couldn’t prevent mass destruction…and faith in heroes is wavering.” - chapter 292

I truly, wholeheartedly, believe that MHA as a story upholds the myth of the perfect victim. I do not want to discuss if Horikoshi did that on purpose, or subconsciously because of inner bias – I find no meaning in doing so. For me the execution of an idea, in the grand scheme of the narrative, holds more value than the intention of the author. I’ve also had my fair share of people infantilizing Asian authors in the anime community for their poor writing decisions for one lifetime. It’s patronizing to both the author and the people reading it. Whether or not Horikoshi intended for his themes of abuse to paint the picture they did does not matter, because that’s how it reads as.

MHA puts victims of abuse in narrow boxes and softly dictates what’s an acceptable reaction to said abuse. Victims are continuously walking a tightrope between being deserving of compassion and sympathy and being unredeemable monsters who are too far gone and are only good for martyrdom after being put down.  

Eri fits the clean cut depiction of abuse victims that media usually gears towards. She is untouched by the cruelty around her - she preserves her innocence and kindness. She isn't assertive, but rather meek and passive. She doesn't fight back with force. And when offered help, she is receptive to it. That is not to say that Eri's depiction doesn't have a place in fiction, or that her portrayal can't be representative of the experiences of some - as we all deal with trauma and the inhumanity people throw at us differently. We see the same thing in the portrayal of Fuyumi, who shares many of the qualities discussed above. The same thing applies to her - i personally love the idea of all the siblings having different reaction to their childhood trauma and abuse. It shows that victims are not some type of monolith.

But the narrative treats the "forgiving" or "receptive to help/support" victims of abuse with more grace and with much more kindness. if you are willing to forgive, or the very least be quietly tolerant, the story grants you a happy ending. Forgiveness isn't a bad thing, it is an individual choice - but an abuse victim shouldn't have to do it for them to have a happy ending.

In a vacuum Eri and Fuyumi's character arcs and depictions of abuse are good but it becomes a problem when that's the only experience and type of victim we ever hold in high value or recognize as valid and deserving of compassion. Which the story reinforces.

Touya and Tenko's backstories aren't pretty nor comfortable or easy to sit through. Their responses to abuse aren't either. Reactive abuse is very much real.

[srslylini]

I have some thoughts about the idea of forgiveness and moving on we see in media and fans. The thoughts mostly come from being in therapy and spending time with people who specialize in those fields and helped me come to terms with my own pain.

This can very well be taken in general but is mostly about Vi.

Right. So.

Vi is a genuinely interesting character, who has gone through hell and back to put it lightly. She lives in conditions in the undercity that has people who don't live in them wear masks to handle them. She grew up and saw her parents die, which means she had to step up. Vander did adopt her, her sister, Mylo and Claggor but Vander still put a lot of responsibilities on Vi. She was told she cannot be selfish when people look up to her.

Then, of course, the entire act 1 of season 1 happens, which in itself is already very much and not something that should have ever happened to anyone, let alone a kid/teenager. She then, on TOP of all of this, got thrown into Stillwater after seeing her entire family die (and presumed Powder also as dead, although she continued to hope), where she was canonically beaten, starved, put into isolation and... the rest is up to interpretation because I guess the writers did not care. But that interpretation is not a good one.

What I am trying to say with all of this is that Vi has been put through so much by the system and by people (Enforcers get a special mention here) all around her.

This gets me to the point. I see a lot of people, the writers themself even, talk about how Vi needs to (or already did) forgive and move on. And I just wonder where this idea comes from?

In all my time in therapy, no matter what and who I talked about, you know what I have never heard? That I need to forgive.

What I heard instead was rather close to this:

"What happened was not your fault. It happened and can't be changed. But there is still something you can do, because you stand here now. You can imagine yourself back then and guide yourself. Hold yourself and tell the younger version of you that what happened isn't ever going to be fine but that you are still here and that you need to be kind to yourself." She told me "take the hand of your younger version and walk her through it because in the end it will have always happened but you can choose to help yourself"

There is a lot more she told me, but that is between her and me. What I am trying to say with this is that not once did I ever get told that I need to forgive the people involved. I am also not trying to say that doing this works for everyone, because health does not work this way. The point I am making is that I find it incredibly weird that we came to the point of saying that the only way to let go is to forgive, when that could not be further from the truth.

I would say understanding it happened and being kind to yourself does a lot more than trying to forgive people who hurt you so much that it ends in you being broken to what seems beyond repair (it isn't I have learned that much, lol). That's what my therapist taught me.

Which brings me back to Vi and why I find the notion of "she needs to forgive and move on to get better" or the writers writing "she forgave and moved on" so weird.

What happened to her is not something that can be forgiven. And... that is okay. Or it should be okay. But for some reason it isn't?

I mean if you can and want to forgive that is for you to do but to say that it is a (or even THE) way to move on does not sit right with me. At all.

[benito-flakes]

The regressive nature of sysmedicalism in regard to trauma survivors

Sysmedicalism is usually attributed to being directed towards endogenic systems in particular, but what happens when those beliefs are turned against the groups they wish to protect? Where does the line get drawn between the seemingly noble desire to stop misinformation and the outright witch-hunting of systems online? 

As a system who has relabeled their identity after years of self-discovery, I have engaged with sysmed rhetoric from the side of an endogenic system as well as from that of a traumagenic one. Unfortunately, I continue to find myself negatively impacted by its effects even now. Despite being the very thing that would be recognized affirmatively in the eyes of a sysmed, I worry I still am not good enough. 

This feeling of personal inadequacy is mixed with a sense of fear, a sinking dread of never fitting a diagnostic mold that will validate me in the eyes of my traumagenic peers. I have no reason to feel this way; I have a trauma history beginning in childhood and my therapist has affirmed the existence of both my system and the individual identities within. I have rushed after a CDD diagnosis to assuage my own fears when my treatment without one has yielded positive results regardless. 

Why do I continue to feel this way? A large part of it is how online communities handle system origins. I find that in attempting to protect traumagenic and/or disordered systems, the medicalized plural community has inadvertently left scars on their own members. When encountering the level of vitriol often directed at non-traumagenic, “non-valid” system types it becomes very easy to develop a mindset of fear. 

Sysmed rhetoric is inherently exclusionary. It promotes dichotomies fundamentally designed to separate: 

Individuals as “valid” vs “invalid” Experiences as objective truths vs experiences as subjective realities “Them” vs “us”  The truth, of course, is that individual experiences are widely variable even within a clinical environment. Diagnostic criteria serve as guidelines but cannot hope to fully encompass the range of structures that function within it.

The hyperfocus on these comparisons is of course problematic, but it is especially so in a community full of traumatized individuals. Knowing that you will be turned on for not fitting a mold, feeling a growing anxiety at presenting yourself in an inoffensive manner, never speaking, behaving, or acting out of line. The need to fawn and placate for fear of harassment and abuse is a perpetuation of trauma cycles that many of us have experienced firsthand. More drastic results of sysmedicalism–fake-claiming and targeted harassment–come from a place of pain; a need to exert control over perceived threats real or imaginary. 

We silence because we have been silenced. 

We tell others they are not good enough because we have been made to feel not good enough.

We hurt because we have been hurt. 

It is not my goal to attack or condemn others for feeling their feelings. What is my goal, however, is to invite plurals to approach one another more compassionately. Viewing my therapy process as personalized to my lived experiences has been incredibly healing when engaging with spaces that often push one-sided viewpoints. Trauma healing and mental health treatment is an individual, tailored process, and that is what we traumagenic plurals should be emphasizing. 

[jynxedshapeshifter]

did. did kristoph gaslight apollo.

i'm not entirely saying this because i'm researching gaslighting and it feels like it fits kristoph and apollo's dynamic in turnabout trump. arguably it's in the text. was it entirely successful? for a time. but looking through the transcript for turnabout trump i'm like "huh. it feels an awful lot like kristoph is gaslighting apollo to get him to start doubting phoenix."

i have to wonder if that's the only time kristoph ever tried to gaslight apollo. i mean, i seriously doubt it personally considering the kind of person kristoph is but regardless.

this explains even more of apollo's behavior in dual destinies too, i think. last time one of his coworkers was accused of murder, he was manipulated and gaslit into thinking it couldn't possibly be true. in turnabout for tomorrow, he's being told athena couldn't possibly be the culprit. he even directly says that he can't fully trust athena with the way things are going in the trial. i would not be surprised if he was thinking back to his first trial and kristoph's manipulation and used "evidence is everything" as a failsafe so he wouldn't be manipulated or gaslit again. it also makes the parallel to kristoph when he does say evidence is everything really really interesting. kristoph used it to manipulate people. apollo's using it to avoid getting manipulated (again).

this is not the first time i've talked about apollo and kristoph's dynamic and how it affected apollo in dual destinies. i have mentioned before that apollo having trauma from kristoph being arrested and imprisoned for murder probably affected his treatment of athena in dual destinies. what i did not bring up is how kristoph's manipulation might've played into it, because i didn't really realize how much kristoph tried to manipulate apollo to avoid being found out as the culprit of shadi's murder.

i also think it's worth mentioning that we do know kristoph was willing to win trials by any means necessary. is it really a stretch to assume he presented some suspicious evidence during court and gaslit or manipulated apollo into not questioning it? on that note, i wonder if he did the same to klavier. we know kristoph is emotionally abusive to klavier. would he really be above gaslighting his employees on a regular basis? (no. no he wouldn't)

[enemywasp]

Alright so someone on tiktok sent me a link to a compiled list of arguments against proshippers and so I wanted to put a sort of brief response of my own thoughts of each point.

Long post warning!

"Proshippers are non-offending minor attracted people in a fresh paint of coat"

What a start, am I right? Okay so first off this is a huge generalisation, not every proshipper engages with or is even comfortable with anything that sexualises fictional children, or ships them with adults. And of those that do ship adult/minor ships, it doesn't always mean they're attracted to the character themselves or gains any sexual pleasure from that.

They then went on to say that although they might be non-offending, they still fantasise about and romanticise children- in the case of proshippers by creating art and stories. And I am not personally educated enough on how people's minds works to go in depth here, but I do know a lot of pedophilic thoughts can be intrusive and unwanted. And I would much rather people engage in this and deal with their thoughts through fiction where no actual children are harmed, than actually go touch a real child or engage is any form of CSEM.

“People can draw and ship whatever they want!”

Here they went on to say that surely to ship and create content you must justify these things in some capacity regardless of them being fictional. And immediately I'd argue, the justification it that they're fictional. And that sometimes you want to read about things you'd never approve of in real life, it's a natural curiosity. And again, regardless of what the dark content is I would take someone engaging in fiction over harming a real person any day.

They compared this to alt-right groups and dark humour justifying racism and transphobia, etc. And whilst I think something we should always be aware of in fiction is stereotypes and how we may be representing people. Youtube videos like this are usually a type of propaganda that AIM to change people's mindsets and turn them against groups. Whereas fiction tells a story, some may have meanings and connections to real life, be a political piece, etc. Not everything is that serious and has a clear distinction from reality.

Think for example, reading/watching about murder and gore. More on that in a second.

"Fiction doesn't affect reality!"

I'm going to be honest I rolled my eyes at this as their main example was slenderman. If you don't know about that, those girls were schizophrenic. Anything could of set off and caused delusions, it just so happened to be fiction. Those girls needed help- not to just read purer content. They also basically brought up propaganda again, which is again deliberate and designed to warp peoples perceptions. Its based of lying and spreading misinformation and passing it as facts. The only thing I strongly believe can be directly harmful is stereotypes if not handled with care. But I think that's something for anyone who writes and consumes content should be aware of regardless of their stances.

Again here they implied that all proshippers are peodophiles. And that they normalise abuse of children. I'd also like to point out that most proshippers I've interacted with online have age boundaries to avoid interacting with minors depending on how graphic or sexual their content is.

"What do you think all stories about murder should stop existing?"

Here they basically argued that killing in media isn't the same as its not romanticised or condoned. YA Novels disagree- mafia stories being the most immediate example to spring to mind. Furthermore, morally grey villains. One of my favourite films is Mr Right. It's about a hitman killing people. Anna kendrick falls in love with him and its framed as a romantic comedy. Funny how its only fanfiction that's criticised like this? I actually have more thoughts on this if anyones interested.

Again they bring up kids not knowing adults pursuing children is wrong, and I'm questioning why children this young are unsupervised on the Internet. How young were you when you were allowed to watch anything with graphic blood or violence? This content isn't made for kids! Especially not anyone so young they can't seperate fiction from reality as most sites have a specific age you have to be to join. And I'm sorry to say it, but on websites and social media where adults can interact with kids, anything can be used to groom kids. (The real thing you should be mad about here is how there's no websites aimed just for children and safe spaces on the Internet anymore cause it can't be monetised as easily)

"Artists are allowed to draw and write about dark people"

They basically said, yes but it's not the same as promoting. Writing something under a romantic light and not saying "Don't do at home!" Isn't promoting. No ones encouraging these things in real life. Or rather, if they are its not because they're a proshipper but rather who they are as a person and their intentions.

The trans example they used is very extreme and honestly something I agree with a little more, fiction can definitely be used as an excuse to say and act out hateful and discriminatory things. Whilst I do think it's something we should discuss and unpack more, I'm not certain of my view on how I would fix this without risking silencing people talking about their experiences.

"Its not my responsibility to look after other people, just block me and the tags"

Here they threw all kinds of accusations. And says that we're making traumatised people jump through hoops to avoid getting retraumatised. I hate this argument, you know people have actual triggers they may not be able to avoid in real life? The world can't bend around you. And I am very sorry if any content online is traumatising to you, but someone could also be traumatised by a certain breed of dog and not want to see it. Should no one post dogs online ever again? A bald man reminds you of an abusive ex? Bald men get off the Internet! You see how this thing can just keep escalating? The tags and warnings are important because they're the best you can get. You can't control the world to protect everyone from everything ever. No ones forcing you to interact, and if you're on any algorithm based content that will encourage that content on your for your page more.

The only thing I think we should take from this is the reminder that warnings and tags are always important.

"You only care about censoring creativity"

Here they defend themselves that oh wouldn't you want freaks out the community! Which again immediately makes me lose respect for you, if you're just going to brand us all as freaks as an argument and generalize us.

No comment on that first line when you can easily argue antishipper do the same.

"Proshippers are not remotely innocent of targeted harrasement" Neither are antis. There's people who take things too far both sides and I'm not going to defend either for that.

"Real kids get assaulted and all you care about is censoring people online!"

Here they shout "oh I can care about both!" But what I don't think they realise is censorship can make it difficult for kids and to learn about how to speak up and to look for signs, or to speak up about their experiences. How do you plan on removing the topic from the Internet whilst also letting victims speak up? And people may want to write fiction based off their experiences. Who are you to go through it and proclaim what is too far, what romanticises it too much? More on this later.

"Antis are reducing my trauma"

They compared this to saying "date rape victims are reducing my trauma because they weren't taken advantage of in the same way as me" which is a disgusting parallel?? Date rape is still rape. Someone writing about something isn't the same as it happening. Although it can be used as harrasment, grooming, etc if directly addressed to you or being constantly sent to you, written about you. But the content existing in general? No.

"I'm coping"

Compared it to self harm, and such. Poetry and diaries are also used to write about your experiences and unpack trauma. Some of which may write it in an unrealistically positive light cause that's how they want to unpack it or explain those thoughts. And yes these things get posted online.

I can't imagine a single therapist or professional psychiatrist of any kind disapproving of creative writing because, again, it's much better than any alternatives of doing real harm to yourself or people around you. Although I do agree that if something is traumatising for you to read about and just upsets you further, be aware of your own boundaries but not everyone is the same so how are you going to police people's own thoughts and emotions.

Also I can't remember who or where as it was years ago now, but I have heard of people who actually realised they were being groomed or abused and just how bad it was through reading about it in a fanfic and seeing it in an outside perspective.

They also say to do it in private, but doesn't everyone on the Internet now have an understanding of finding a community and looking out for eachother and sharing experiences?

"There's more nuance here than just calling proshippers peodophiles"

Here they say no matter what it still comes down to whether it's ever okay to sexualise minors in certain contexts. And again, not every proshipper does this or is even comfortable with engaging in this kind of content. And further, no one is sexualising real minors in this context.

"I'm a proshipper and a minor tho!"

I'd agree minors should be wary of the spaces they're in but proship spaces aren't always necessarily sexual, graphic or 18+. Saying they're being groomed feels like you're watering down that term. I was a proshipper at age 13, I didn't interact with anyone online about it though, I didn't even know that was the term. I just came to the conclusion that it's just fiction all on my own. Minors aren't idiots.

At then end they talk about their own experience being groomed and I'm obviously not going to nitpick or criticise their experiences. I will point out that one person being bad and taking advantage of you and using content to do so doesn't mean everyone is like that. I am sorry to anyone who has been taken advantage of by someone who claims they're a proshipper though. There are people who have turned out to be horrible on both sides.

I am ill and it's late but I want to get this up sooner rather than later so please ask for clarification on anything. I'm always up for a discussion on this topic as I do believe some of these points do have merits at times and that this whole topic is not black and white

[witchtwig]

I think Agatha's grief over Nicholas isn't just that he died. It isn't just over that Rio had to walk him beyond the veil. But it is over the fear and worry that she couldn't be a good mother, that she hadn't been. That the time that they spent together, using him as a lure for witches--she had not been good enough.

She has so long to sit with the grief, I feel like it could easily spiral into that. She places the blame on continuing to hunt witches and use his song. But what about the other deeper fears too--if he had grown up, would he have come to resent her? Because let's be clear, she upped her con after his death, but even if he had lived--she would have kept hunting other witches.

I'd argue even if he had been born healthy without the fear of Rio hanging over them, she would hunt other witches down. Agatha's fear of other witches is deepseeded trauma for her, and she was going to follow that path of power either way.

Agatha's had a lot of time to work up a million different scenarios where she failed him as a mother in her mind, beyond how she feels like she cannot go to see him now. He's very much her one tender spot where she can see herself as doing wrong, because her mother did so poorly by her.

Then add on top of it, she was in love with Death, who had to claim her child. Did she worry it was a way of Rio seeing her as unfit for motherhood, so she was denying her that? Rio who knew her heart, knew the pain of Evanora?

This woman who is a survivor couldn't save herself from this situation. Couldn't have enough power to protect herself from it, to protect Nicholas. She's always protected herself, but this wasn't something she could protect herself from.

I just imagine Agatha's grief as brambles that are so deeply tangled and painful around her own heart.

[cyanide-sippy-cup]

Okay now that Anissa is in the show, I have to talk about THAT storyline. There's not much particularly new I can say that hasn't already been discussed but I need to gather my thoughts on what the show has to do to be successful in this regard. With that being said,

Spoilers for things the show has not covered yet

And massive Trigger Warning for discussions of sexual assault and post-assault trauma.

So first things out of the way, I do not believe they should cut it. The changes the show has made are ultimately pretty minor. A character change, order of events swapped. With them sticking as close as they are to the comic, I think it would be a massive problem to skip over it from a story telling standpoint.

From a real world standpoint, it's even more important. Male sexual assault is something that rarely gets depicted properly. It's usually a joke or a moment of triumph and that very much has had an effect on the way we look at it in the real world. And since Invincible is now a show pretty much everybody has their eyes on, choosing not to talk about it would be missing an opportunity to have a very real, very important conversation that very well could educate men on how to navigate and survive what they are going through.

I'm also worried that they'll be too afraid to actually say the word "rape". Lots of modern adaptations delete important discussions like Sokka's sexism or the gender discussions from Cowboy Bebop in order to avoid properly handling them and usually replace them with something worse in a sort of "all bark and no bite" liberalism. Directly saying it as it is is incredibly important to showing that talking about it is not only NOT shameful, but also necessary in getting the help you need and the healing that is necessary to survive.

And from a storytelling standpoint, saying it is important too. The moment where Mark tells Eve what happened is not only great in showing that telling someone is important but is also the moment where Mark is forced to admit the truth to himself. "She raped me." Those three words are a massive turning point for the whole story. Character dynamics change, this becomes a focus for most of Mark's loved ones, and it fundamentally changes his life.

Markus. This is a piece of the puzzle I don't see many talk about. While the rest is a showcase of what to do, Markus as a character is a showcase of what not to. It is so, so rare that a child conceived of a rape is properly depicted, nevermind discussed. From Mark's POV, he holds no ill will towards his son. He simply wants him to live a life on Earth with his family like he did and just can't be with him because he is needed in space. But to Markus, his dad hates him. He thinks his father keeps him on Earth so that he doesn't have to think about him. And this idea of his father's disgust contorts his image of himself. He begins to feel self-hatred, hatred towards his mother for making him this way, and hatred towards his father for abandoning him and leaving him to despise what he sees in the mirror. "You made Terra with love. I was made with hate."

Whether Mark meant it or not, his neglect of Markus ruined his early life. No matter how many friends he made, what groups he joined, they could never fill that hole. He idolized his father. I mean, how could he not? His father was, IS a great hero. A man who was out at that very moment leading the movement for universal peace. But because Mark barely visited him, he only had an idea of what his father was like. A man who sacrificed so much to help the world, who fought in space and yet still managed to save the Earth dozens of times. A man who had the time to help everyone and yet couldn't make time for him.

(Important edit: in no way do I mean to say Mark is obligated to be a part of his son's life, I meant that Mark chooses to be there but ultimately fails to do so and that causes issues)

And don't get me wrong, this story has some pretty glaring flaws. For example I think they tried a little too hard to teach Mark that the person who hurt him is human too and has positively affected the lives of many. Like absolutely there is a conversation to be had there but because they had to move on with the plot they kinda just went "HEY MARK DON'T BE SAD SHE'S COOL NOW AND ALSO SHE'S DEAD SO THERE'S NO POINT IN LINGERING OKAY BYYEEEEE". But I think instead of these flaws scaring the show away they should invite the show forward. It's an opportunity to improve on the story and discussions rather than shy away from it.

Oh and also harking back to my previous point in paragraph 2, there's another aspect that makes it stand out in an important discussion. If I'm remembering correctly, the comic makes it pretty clear that Mark could have overpowered Anissa but didn't for a couple of reasons, namely not wanting to hurt her. And that is SO important and SO rare. A discussion surrounding an assault victim who could have fought back but didn't where the victim is NOT portrayed as in the wrong and in fact just as worthy to be traumatized as any other victim is SO DAMN IMPORTANT and could legit change a lot in the way we look at these topics.

So yeah, I think the series should adapt it. Also I think it would be great if they brought on actual victims and experts and whatnot so their depiction could be just that much more focused around what needs to be said. Sorry if all this read as klunky, I have a lot of thoughts bouncing around up here that I kinda just spewed onto the page with no particular order. I'm also obviously not the most educated on the topic. My personal experiences with this were relatively minor and not something I've ever felt comfortable addressing. And yeah I know it's important no matter how "small" or "minor" it seems and I'm not trying to downplay any of that but I just don't really have the words to phrase that differently. Which is exactly why I think we NEED education and discussions about this stuff so that we DO know the words to navigate the topic.

[the-moon-is-a-hoe]

I feel really terrible for Caine. He's clearly been through some shit. The way he glitches out when he's alone... or when he's feeling insecure... call me crazy, but he seems like he's been traumatized by something. The implications of his name don't help... I think he killed somebody he wasn't supposed to and it scarred him for life.

... I wish I could give Caine a hug and just comfort him a whole bunch...

[recitedemise]

Before I get on to some replies, I am sat here trying to digest all my thoughts again nearly 1 year after leaving my abusive ex.

And what struck me is how absolutely racist they were and are.

It doesn't escape me that their last two exes (including me) were Asian. It doesn't escape me that they consume a lot of Asian media. It doesn't escape me that, one time, they came to me to vent about their ex before me, upset people said they had an asian fetish when their ex 'was tan and aggressive' when, if they really had an asian fetish, they'd go for a pale and more meek person.

It doesn't escape me that after they would corner both me and their ex before me to absolute mental breaks where we would retaliate with anger that they would call us aggressive abusers. It doesn't escape me that I tried breaking up with them countless times, was begged to stay because 'I was the only thing that made them happy' and that 'they wouldn't know what to do without me'. It doesn't escape me that when we did FINALLY break up because THEY allowed it, they told me that we should break up because 'they can't be with someone with such inordinate anger' when, in my last attempt to break up with them, I tried breaking up for 4 hours. Straight.

The last break up attempt came after they blew up at me and my friends. I was so stressed out with this constant abuse, and them freaking out so royally was too much. They then asked me to go on a trip to see them because it would be good for our relationship. They said I didn't have to, though, and because I wasn't ready to see them after everything, all the crying, all the breaking down in parking lots, all the driving lost and in tears and sitting on the side of a highway for hours just wailing, I said no. I'm not ready.

They then got so upset and kept going 'well, you went to see your other friends. I don't come down there that often. I came to see you when I was upset. I was really looking forward to this. If you don't want to go, then you don't. I don't need you there to bring down the mood.' They said they weren't guilt tripping me, by the way.

Fed up, I finally had enough. I said we're breaking up. It isn't my first time wanting to break up either because I would constantly capitulate when they crossed my boundaries and ignored my discomfort and desires. But I would capitulate because they NEVER took no for an answer, and I was too weak to stand my ground, and I would always just want the talking to end. I was consistently overstimulated and gave up.

So. I tried breaking up one last time, and again: distress.

4 hours of me saying 'I want to break up. That's final.'

4 hours of them going 'no, please. Why? I'm so confused. I wasn't guilt tripping you. I don't know where you see that?'

4 hours of them going 'please stay with me. Please water the seeds of our love.'

4 hours of calls and constant texts.

4 hours of them going 'I know you love me still somewhere. You used to love me. You can learn to love me again.'

4 hours where they wrote me letters and sent them to me during their therapy session.

4 hours of never listening to me when I said 'I think I feel better/healthier away from you.'

4 hours of them telling me they thought I was in therapy and that I have to keep going to love them again. Ignoring the fact that I was in therapy primarily because of my distress being in this relationship. Them denying the possibility that my health, I realized, was better without them, and them refusing to allow me that space.

4 hours of repeatedly disrespecting my desires and boundaries for their own comfort.

4 hours where I finally blew up and called them stupid and annoying, something they threw back at me as proof of my 'inordinate anger' when they finally agreed to the break up 3 DAYS LATER.

Yeah. I guess Asians are all docile and sweet. They just happened to end up with the two that weren't. I say this all very sarcastically, but how unfortunate.

And after all that, they told their friend, who later came to me saying they were trying to do a nice and good thing for us with which I blew up at and that I was exceptionally cruel.

Okay. I guess good people just suck it up always, huh, and have no boundaries ever? I shoulda been super sweet and did whatever they wanted for the millionth time at the cost of my own sanity. Why not! I'm disposable in comparison, after all! Sucks I missed the memo!

[pynkhues]

Poor Lestat laying in fetal position, looking so small and having dead eyes :( Armand saying he's come home was so creepy, wtf was he thinking. You know, this scene just doesn't make any sense to me, why would Lestat go out of his own will to a place that's the biggest ptsd trigger you can imagine. To punish himself I guess? Sometimes it feels like Rolin wants Lestat to have so much agency that he never allows him to be a victim. Kinda worried how they'll handle s3 wrt this. I hope they won't victim blame him for every bad thing that happened to him because 'he deserved it'.

Oh, anon, I'm sorry because this is probably not what you want to hear, but I love that Armand said that Lestat's come home by going back to the place he was turned and assaulted, because it feels really emotionally honest and true to these characters.

Claudia, Armand and Lestat are all victim-survivors, and I think the show's demonstrated that it's really curious as to what that means.

There's a school of thought that's currently becoming more understood in feminist circles that victim-survivors can often not believe each other, or diminish each other's experiences. The nature of the sort of abuse that Claudia, Armand and Lestat have all experienced is that they've had to process it to a point where they feel they are the expert of their story. They know what happeend to them, they've gone through a lot to know what happened to them, and it's a way for them to take control back of their own stories. An unfortunate side effect is that it can lead to these victim-survivors feeling they know more about your story than you.

They've survived it, so they feel they can tell who's the liar and who's the truthteller, who got off easy, who had it worse, who's stories are more than or less than, and that idea itself is a trauma response manifesting as something ugly, right? Abuse and assault are felt in so many different ways and manifest in so many diffferent forms, but this idea can take hold in victim-survivors as a means of taking control over what happened to them. If they can use - which Lestat does when he weaponises Claudia's rape against her in the train to force her to come home - undermine - which Claudia does against Lestat when she tells Louis not to take Lestat's truth as fact - or diminish - as Armand does against Lestat when he shrugs off Daniel's question about Magnus in 2.03 and talks about Lestat coming home in 2.08 - this subset of people will.

Armand is a character who has endured unimaginable sexual abuse. To divorce that from his understanding of Lestat's own trauma does both characters a huge disservice. How they navigate each other as two survivors of (very different!) forms of sexual violence is interesting, and it's unsurprising that Armand, having been groomed and assaulted by Marius, would view a maker's home as - - well, home.

And frankly regardless of that, if the show stays true to the book, Lestat will live there for a while after Magnus' death because he has no money, no one to call on, and no idea who he is now that he's been turned. Gabrielle lives with him for a while there! Magnus' tower is, in the books, a very complicated place for Lestat.

[thewayuarent]

Ways of handling addictions in Only Friends

Tw: drug abuse, overdose

Let me tell this straight away - I was in a relationship with addicted person. By the time we started dating they didn’t use drugs for about couple of months by still used alcohol a lot. They’d come a long way to be clean and I was there all the time every time. This year they collapsed. Drug overdose, the end of it.

So I know that my personal experience doesn’t make me a profi automatically. Addiction is a very complex subject and very personal experience. But I do know a thing or two about it.

And the first rule here is: addicted person will never stop because of you. They need to want it for themselves.

By this moment we’ve been shown three different dynamics where one person is addicted and the other isn’t: Sand and Ray, Mew and Ray and Mew and Top.

Start with Mew and Ray. The thing is, Mew has no obligation to save Ray. He was there for him in the worst moment and, yes, I really want to say that he had to do more for Ray - he is his closest friend and he is definitely struggling - but. But Mew has a right to step away. Because navigating someone through healing is very hard and very long process and Mew doesn’t have to deal with it. I can’t blame him honestly for that.

For what I can critique not Mew specifically but the whole friend group (all four of them yes) is the very next scene where them all - including Ray - are drinking. Like guys, Ray right here tried to overdose, may be it would be nice to have a fucking break?

The Mew and Top situation is way different. Mew finds out Top uses drugs - that’s not the best thing to learn about someone, sure. But Mew doesn’t take time to think about “do I need that in my life” (which would be understandable), no. He makes a statement: stop using drugs and I’ll have sex with you. There is your price by the way. And this is also understandable - it is a manipulation, yes, but it’s very common way to try to handle things like that, and I would argue Mew has good intentions here. And oh, Mew, my boy, I’m sorry but that’s not how things work. You know Top can have more in a phone call, right? You understand that person saying “I’m not an addict” while having a dose in his pocket it’s at least a bit shady? I know that it doesn’t automatically implicates that Top is a hard addict but still.

But he is already lying about it. Using drugs while having fun with your friends it’s not the same thing as calling your dealer and using it alone in your room because you struggle with emotions, just saying.

Making him choose will never work out. Because he will choose, and it won’t be you.

And what’s about Sand and Ray? Sand knows for a fact that Ray has problems with alcohol. He doesn’t know about drugs, at least for now. Sand and Ray know each other for a very short period of time, and Sand is “it’s not my business” type of person, so I don’t criticize him while saying the next thing. But.

Sand is unintentionally supportive of Ray’s addictions. He drinks with him a lot - they are drinking buddies. I can’t be sure but it’s kind of looks like there will be a weed smoking next episode? For Sand drinking time to time and smoking weed can be fine - he is not addicted (by what we know). For Ray it is a call. So of course Sand, so as Mew, has a whole right to live his life without dealing with Ray’s addictions. But they are definitely falling for each other. That can develop into relationship. And then it will suddenly be a problem. But isn’t it already? How will Ray react if Sand suddenly turns from drinking/smoking with him to trying to stop him? I would say not the best way. There is also an option that for Sand it won’t be a problem so we’ll see.

The addiction is not a verdict. Both Top and Ray are young and very rich and it’s a very common thing for young rich people to have some kind of stuff - drugs, alcohol or both. It doesn’t automatically mean they are doomed. But still whoever decides to be in relationship with them (Mew and Sand, talking to you) have to think about it and think hard. Do you understand what are you dealing with? Do you honestly want to deal with it? Are you ready for all of highs and lows you’re going to face? If yes, then good luck to you - it really can work out. But don’t fool yourself into thinking that there is nothing to worry about.

[mad-hunts]

one thing about barton is that he (unfortunately) has the most dead-eyed stare half the time, even when he's describing something extremely traumatic that happened to him, so people may not know whether it's due to the fact that he just doesn't feel like he has ' life ' in him or if this is because he was really messed up by the trauma (it's both. it's both in most cases)

[system-of-a-feather]

Anyone with psychological abuse through means of someone intentionally inducing altered states of consciousness ever find that they are EXTREMELY protective of their ability to maintain a clear mind and ability to perceive things and just a very strong avoidance for anything that can possible cloud their vision and clarity of stuff?

Cause our system has literally never touched weed, alcohol, drugs of any form (and also part of why our system really enjoys Buddhism which is built around clarity of mind) because - even before we were really aware of that sort of abuse - had this extreme discomfort and distaste towards anything and anyone having the ability to warp or influence our internal experience and life.

It also honestly deeply extends to our history of refusing to attach, bond, befriend, or engage in romance with anyone growing up because attachment of any form opens people up to being able to influence how we feel and interact with others and overall this extreme protective nature of our internal, mental, and emotional experiences have honestly guided our life and interactions with others more than really any other trauma / mental health thing.

I feel that extreme level of protectiveness over anything that could be an external factor really comes from such young experiences of that predatory kind of manipulation of psychological states and experiences and just how invasive and powerful being able to influence others like that can be.

Open mic for anyone who wants to chime in and share thoughts they feel to be relevant.

(And honestly also reinforced because growing up we were also explicitly taught how to predate and both told to do so / encouraged to do so in the same manner so first hand know how easy it is to control people in those sorts of way)

((God I always am like "our sister really wasnt THAT bad" until I write it out and go ".... man ok yeah she was kind of batshit huh"))

[vorac1ous]

❛        WHATEVER'S  WRONG  WITH  ME,    i  will  take  to  bed    …        ❜

ཐི♰ཋྀ ˚₊‧⁺                marya,    masha,    maker  of  evil.    she  is  the  sybarite,    the  tempter  to  sin,    a  droning  siren's  song.    once,    but  one  more  soul  to  throw  on  her  king's  holy  pyre.    she  comes  to  learn        —        the  self  bleeds  away  in  this  shape,    as  ink  to  water,    until  even  one's  body  is  not  one's  own.    it  will  lead  to  her  disfigurement;    had  she  lost  command  over  herself,    as  so  ever  cautioned?        no,    it  is  her  kin  who  would  suffer  their  children  to  such  grief,    provided  they  were  bred  their  soldiers.    a  purpose    perverted    for  the  wills  of  men.        (    and  what  gods  would  forsake  them  in  this  way?        for  what  cause  would  they  lay  upon  their  supposed  divine  this  curse,    and  not  quell  wickedness  at  its  birth?    )        the  healers  do  their  best  to  piece  her  back  together,    but  she  will    never    walk  with  quite  the  same  strength.    the  same  stature.                𝓒oⁿtᵢ𝖓ᵘe!