#abigail discourse

[sdv-confessions]

Sending this in on nations women’s day yay, and in honors of that, WOMEN IN STARDEW VALLEY ARE INTERESTING. Y’ALL IUST DON’T CARE ENOUGH TO LOOK. Hayley has one of the best character arcs in the game but, oh no, she’s “mean” but Shane’s just fine!! (not a dig on Shane, love him, just some of his fans) Maru can be funny asf if you take the time to READ HER DIALOG.

Jodi is one of my favorite characters by far. She loves her sons and husband but also wishes she had more freedom in her life. She’s just a kind soul who cares about her family, just wishes she could’ve had it a different way. Robin has an up and down relationship with her husband which results in a complicated one with her son. IT’S AN INTERESTING DYNAMIC. SHE IS NOT BORING BECAUSE SHE IS A WIFE AND MOTHER.

Penny has her whole Pam thing and not to mention, lots of quirks of her own. Like being bad at cooking which results in some really funny scenes. While I am not a fan of her, Caroline, has interesting family dynamics. And on that topic Abigail is more than a “manic pixie girl” god forbid a woman be into the occult. Again, she has really interesting dynamics. Even though her family dynamics are tense, she still says “I’m wearing our matching family sweater under my coat… Don’t tell Dad!” or something like that. She clearly still loves her family despite the ups complications. And she has a whole friend circle with Sam and Sebastian.

Emily is amazing. She has so many interest and quirks. And her relationship with her filled with so much thought. They’re so different, they argue and tease each other, but they love each other. They are all they have. Leah has a whole life before Pelican Town. She has dreams, hopes, aspirations, messy ex’s. Listen to me and LISTEN TO ME CLOSE. JUST BECAUSE A WOMEN HAS ROMANCE IN HER LIFE. DOES NOT MAKE HER BORING.

And then you got sweet granny Evelyn. Oh my Yoba, I love this woman so much. She loves her husband and grandson so much. Always tending to plants, making cookies for everyone. I would die for this woman. And then, on the opposite end, Jas. She is such a little sweet heart who deserved so much better in life. Her dynamic with Shane is so special. And her friendship with Vincent in Leo. Ugh. There is so much to this kid and she gets so much shit for being “creepy” THATS A CHILD.

Let’s move onto her god-aunt (?) Marnie. I will say it again and I will say it again loudly. JUST BECAUSE A WOMAN HAS ROMANCE IN HER LIFE DOES NOT MAKE HER BORING. Her relationship with Lewis is such an interesting part to the valley that adds so much drama and depth to these characters. The fact she takes Shane and Jas in, the fact she cares and worry’s so much for Shane. The way she cares for her animals.. ugh. I love her.

Moving onto our out of town girlies, we got Sandy and Birdy. Sandy is such a mystery, I love her. I do wish we got to know more about her, but her mystery is part of her charm. She’s just so fun to talk to. I wish I had more to say but unfortunately I only have around 5 hearts with her due to not going to the desert to much. And then Birdy… Her storyline is so tragic. I really wished we got to behind her. Her decision to watch over her husband’s bones is so UGH. No one should force her to move on. She has made her choice and it’s powerful.

And I think I’ve covered all Stardew woman. So maybe take from this rant… to read dialog. Because these woman are strong, flawed, and amazing.

.

[pinkysberg]

is it misogynistic to critique a flawed female character? of course not. is it misogynistic if the only characters you find yourself investing time into actively critiquing are the female characters? i mean, if i were you i'd maybe invest some time into self reflection.

also lets put our intersectionality caps on while we're at it. maybe you find your critiques being levelled more frequently, with more intensity at a queer/gnc presenting character, or a black character, so on so forth.

we can all be flawed and any good character is flawed. that's what makes them interesting. but perhaps we can dedicate more energy into dissecting the misdeeds of dudes in media more often as well. i don't know. how about that?

[moeitsu]

If your only argument for shipping Arthur and John is “well they’re not real” stay the hell away from me.

I’m not even going to get into why IT IS incest. But here’s my take nonetheless:

Shipping incestuous relationships, even among fictional characters, is ethically problematic. It normalizes taboo behaviors and can distort perceptions of healthy relationships. Incest is universally recognized as harmful due to the potential for exploitation, abuse, and genetic risks. Romanticizing such relationships in fiction risks trivializing these serious issues. Choosing to ship incestuous relationships, even in fiction, perpetuates a harmful misconception and undermines the effort to cultivate a respectful and understanding narrative.

Misinterpreting a familial bond between characters raised as siblings as romantic chemistry reflects a misunderstanding of a healthy adult relationship.

It's important to be able to distinguish between different types of relationships. Such as recognizing the boundaries between familial love and romantic love. When people romanticize these sibling-like relationships, it blurs these distinctions. And it creates misconceptions about appropriate relationship dynamics.

This misinterpretation underscores the need for highlighting the role of media literacy in appreciating diverse human connections. Portraying and perceiving these characters' relationship as romantic undermines the value of familial bonds and may foster unrealistic expectations in adult relationships. It's crucial for audiences to acknowledge and respect the various meaningful connections that extend beyond romantic narratives.

I’m sorry if this reads like an essay, but as someone who’s taken media literacy classes in college and grown up in the Superwholock fandom, I have a lot to say on this topic. Engaging with fandoms and media since a very young age has deepened my understanding of how narratives influence societal norms and personal perceptions. It’s fascinating yet concerning to witness how certain portrayals in media can impact a fans interpretations and behaviors.

I want this to be open for discussion, because I think it’s important to promote a healthy and thoughtful consumption of media. As well as contribute to healthier representations and relationships in media and storytelling.

That’s it, goodnight, sleep tight, and be kind.

[anti-transphobia]

Everyone posts about how Stardew Valley is a cozy LGBT+ inclusive game but NO ONE mentions the lack of a platonic option for the bachelors/bachelorettes. Which would be good for aspec people and also just more pleasant for many casual players I believe but that's not even the point. I just want to become best friends with everyone and not only does that require me dating everyone at once and feeling like a sleazebag because of it (ik the bad cutscene can be avoided but I know in my heart they'd be hurt if they knew) BUT it also means the women flirt with me!!!!! Constantly!!!!!!! It makes me sick to my stomach. Truly ruining the characters I liked

[grandwretch]

its so funny to me when ppl realize that the founding fathers weren't puritans like guys actually puritanical ideals weren't as prevalent in colonial america as you were led to believe. your elementary school teacher lied to you about history just as much as they lied to you about biology. they were a small religious sect that eventually grew larger as a reactionary movement against social freedoms. most of the founding fathers thought jesus was just some guy. when they said 'under god' they didn't mean The God; they mostly meant 'i mean there's got to be some guy up there doing all this shit right? so we should all probably be good people to make him happy'. john adams said he thought organized religion was stopping us from achieving utopia. there were gay people in colonial america and everyone knew they were gay. the entire country was not massachusetts.

[scarfacemarston]

Fandom time;

This might come off as annoying, but I don't care. I've done so much for this fandom since I started posting in 2018ish. I'm the one that did all the history, the journals and the audio files AND all the Abigail and John Meta. (There are many others who have written Meta, but I really dug into the Abigail stuff for sure.) How is it that I literally write several big metas about Abigail, repost a few and then suddenly there are a ton of them. I get great minds think a like, but I had some pretty unique points and I had sources.

I'm not saying they're stealing. I think could be potentially speaking, but it's frustrating because I've been around for ages trying to get people to pay attention and yet I bring up new points, get ignored, someone else brings up points and they get all the reblogs. Heck, I've even had hate mail sent to me over my Abigail posts. Some of this literally happened with my John posts, especially my creative ones and my modern au ones magically appearing nearly word for word. Or people stealing my editing work. Literally, I see people saying what I'm saying and shortening it. That's one of the ONLY differences. This fandom sure likes to borrow things because this is more than just "I agree with Abigail being treated poorly thing" or "Dutch was lying". That's fine and cool to see people agree, but using SO MANY of my same talking points and in such detail? I'm tried of it.

[matthew2641]

A Baptism in Blood: The Nihilistic Purification of Hannibal

The notion of forgiveness, as expounded through the discourses of theological and moral philosophy, is a sacrosanct act of severance  - an ontological renewal through which individuals extricate themselves from past transgressions and recalibrate their moral and spiritual equilibrium. In the Christian paradigm, absolution is more than a juridical reprieve; it is an act of divine purgation, not merely pardoning sin but obliterating it, restoring innocence and severing its corrupting power. However, in Hannibal, this notion is deliberately perverted: forgiveness is not a liberation but an instrument of subjugation. Here, absolution transforms into an ouroboric rite - a macabre liturgy in which supplicants become ensnared within a necrotic lattice of control, culpability, and annihilation.

One aspect in which this perversion manifests is within the series’s rich visual and symbolic motifs. The sumptuous meals that Hannibal prepares are more than just indulgences of the flesh; they are sacraments suffused with an unholy grandeur. Such lavish repasts exist as malevolent doppelgängers of the Christian tradition of the Eucharist, meant to symbolise transubstantiation of Christ’s flesh into a vehicle of grace, Hannibal’s consumption by contrast, is a damnation - devouring rather than sanctifying, his victims desecrated in an unctuous theatre of aestheticised predation. Moreover, the recurring image of water furthers this inversion. Initially invoking the cleansing imagery of baptismal purification, water is rendered an agent of chaos. No cleansing flows from its depths, only a primal abyss, harkening back to the amniotic void. The act of submerging oneself in water, often shown as violent or disturbing, mutates into a harbinger of failed renewal. In this universe, salvation is not a promise of true spiritual redemption, but a bitter mirage that remains forever out of reach.

Nowhere is this corruption more evident than in the complex dynamics between Hannibal Lecter, Will Graham, and Abigail Hobbs. These relationships transcend simple character interplay, becoming a dialectical struggle for domination - a form of esoteric communication in which forgiveness is neither beatific nor emancipatory, only a talisman of domination. Love, by extension, is not an unblemished vessel of tenderness; rather, a festering wound aching with ruinous yearning. Encumbered by self-interest, mutual defilement, and the inexorable erosion of the self.

Will and Hannibal, though seemingly poised at opposite ends of the moral spectrum, perceive Abigail not as an autonomous individual but as a conceptual artifact. She is a spectral effigy of lost purity - an ersatz daughter for Will, and for Hannibal, a revenant for his beloved Mischa - a fulcrum upon which their competing theological visions pivot. The visual syntax of the series accentuates the dissonant and impossible nature of her position - she is placed in spaces of tension, at the margins of the frame or physically estranged from the protagonists, yet never truly outside of their gravitational pull. In this way, her existence is marked by the temporal stasis of purgatory: a suspended, interstitial space where she remains forever on the cusp of identity, never wholly belonging to either father figure, and yet, inextricably tied to both. 

Christian eschatology heralds forgiveness as a conduit through which the soul is restored to its Edenic purity. Yet, Abigail is a soul exiled from such simplistic dualities, contesting this purity model. Neither wholly victim nor unrepentant perpetrator, she is caught between the inherited monstrosity of her father and conscious agency. Through an awareness of this fact, she seeks not purification, but survival. Will seeks to absolve her in Potage (S1E3), reflecting the previously outlined transactional view of absolution: “You’re not your father. You’re not the monster he wanted you to become.” Here, Will assumes the role of a Christ-like redeemer, his forgiveness appearing as a salvific benediction meant to deliver her from the taint of her father’s sins. However, this is a forgiveness steeped in self-deception, for Will, pardoning Abigail is not a divine absolution but a desperate invocation of lost agency, an illusory salve for his own complicity in the horrors that have shaped her existence. His forgiveness does not cleanse - it merely recontextualizes, a futile endeavour attempting to transmute guilt into grace. This aligns with Freud’s concept of repetition compulsion, wherein trauma is unconsciously reenacted in a doomed effort to master it. Will is no benevolent saviour; but a man entrapped in the recursive architecture of his own psyche, seeking in Abigail the scaffold upon which to reconstruct his fragmented self. Abigail, like Will, remains trapped in the moral ambiguity of her actions - a state of perpetual suspension denied both salvation and damnation. Will’s ultimate descent into annihilation, culminating in his sanguinary embrace with Hannibal in The Wrath of the Lamb (S3E13), is the apotheosis of this compulsion. His self-immolation is far from an act of transcendence, but an ecstatic obliteration -  an offering of the self upon the altar of a love too corrosive to sustain anything but devastation. By embracing Hannibal and consummating his surrender to the abyss Will conflates destruction with agency.

Hannibal, in contrast, reframes Abigail’s trauma as an inheritance, her father’s sins are not burdens to be expunged, but rather emblems of a greater power. In Potage, he tells her, “You accepted who he was. You will always have that over Will. You already knew your father. He had to wonder.” Rather than offering liberation, Hannibal reshapes Abigail’s identity through his forgiveness, binding her to him, not as an act of grace but of possession. Unlike Will, who seeks to absolve Abigail of her past, Hannibal weaponizes it, turning it into the foundation for her rebirth under his guidance. In this respect Abigail, too, finds herself in the circuitry of repetition compulsion. Having been raised in a world where survival meant complicity, she may have found Hannibal's tutelage familiar. In helping stage her own death, she attempts to reclaim agency, denouncing emancipation in favour of continuity through submission to a structure she understands and now believes has the means to navigate, a fatalistic embrace of the cycle. Abigail’s transformation from victim to willing participant in Hannibal’s world marks her final, tragic rejection of Will’s version of redemption. She no longer seeks forgiveness in the traditional sense; she seeks something more elusive - her own place in a world devoid of clear moral absolutes.

Hannibal, however, is no supplicant. He does not yearn for forgiveness as a means of redemption; he demands it as an enthronement. His lament to Will, “I let you know me. See me. I gave you a rare gift, but you didn’t want it,” is not merely an elegy of rejection but an indictment of disobedience. For Hannibal’s desire is not purification but acceptance, and thus his transgressions are not aberrations but testaments to his divinity, earning exaltment. In this way, he is not simply a perversion of the Christ figure - he is a parodic Messiah, a devouring wolf clothed in the sheep's vestments. For Hannibal, forgiveness is not an act of grace but a mechanism of consumption: to forgive him is to surrender, to relinquish oneself utterly. Will, though a long faltering disciple, eventually succumbs to the ecstatic inevitability of this theology in Mizumono (S2E13). During which he allows himself to be gored in a "strange surrender," as Bryan Fuller describes it: "He allows the gutting. He almost feels as if he deserves it in light of what he’s done; he’s betrayed Hannibal." An oblation offered in penance for his own betrayal. This is not a fault in his forgiveness, but its consummation: an eschatological revelation in which he does not simply forgive Hannibal, but surrenders to the all-consuming sanctity of his doctrine.

Abigail’s final moments in Mizumono serve as the ultimate repudiation of Christian forgiveness. Her resurrection, a grotesque parody of divine rebirth, is devoid of redemptive meaning. She is not restored to life in a triumphant sense but merely to become a pawn in Hannibal’s grand tragedy. When Hannibal slits Abigail’s throat, it is not an act of wrath but the fulfilment of his twisted liturgy. He "saved" Abigail, in the sense that he let her live under his wing, but her existence was always contingent upon his will and in failing to become his ideal, she is excised with the same clinical elegance with which she was preserved. In Christian doctrine, failing to receive divine forgiveness results in eternal separation from God. Hannibal, as an almost godlike figure in his own narrative, enacts this separation with brutal finality. This slaughter consolidates the theological schema Hannibal wishes to impose upon his world, that there is no celestial amnesty as we understand it, no boundless agape through which the fallen may be redeemed - there is merely possession and excision. The very method of Abigail’s undoing, the languid incision across her throat, mimics the Christian iconography of the Paschal lamb, a sacrificial archetype of innocence. Though, unlike the sanctified oblation of Christ, Abigail is stripped of volition and thus redemptive teleology; not martyred but discarded, reduced to an ornamental casualty in Hannibal’s cathedral of ruin. As her body was cradled against the cavernous dark of her surroundings, the composition recalls the Pietà, yet absent of its sublimity. This is not the Madonna lamenting the body of a crucified Son, but a predatory deity relinquishing his broken creation with preordained savagery. Then, as the desecration is completed, Hannibal steps into the storm, allowing for the rain to baptise him in an additional blasphemous mimicry of penitential ablution. But this is no true purification, no soul is made luminous beneath the torrential downpour, it simply erases. A nihilistic effacement washing away all false pretences that both Will and Hannibal had married themselves to - that Abigail might yet be redeemed, that Hannibal might be anything but consuming. 

In the wake of Abigail’s death, Will is left to contend with the futility of his forgiveness. His attempts to redeem her, to offer absolution were rendered impotent. Abigail had not only failed in being liberated but had the tragedy of her existence prolonged. Such profound inevitability led Will to become more amenable to Hannibal’s version of forgiveness, and ultimately submit himself to it fully. In the grand design of Hannibal, forgiveness does not sever the shackles of guilt - it tightens them, binding its recipients in the recursive waltz of moral contamination. In this exquisite distortion of Christian sacrament, lies the surest route of destruction.

[sdv-confessions]

unpopular opinion but having random beef with characters makes the game 10x more fun. Like yes, I beef with Abigail for specific dialogue i got. Yes I beef with Pierre for being a stinky credit-thieving proto capitalist. It adds enrichment if all the characters aren't flawless and ur bestie.

.

[positivelybeastly]

Back Home!

It's good to be back. Will endeavour to use tonight and tomorrow to be a little more active and pretend that this is still something approximating a roleplay blog.

Also, minor rant under the cut.

I get so incredibly tired of the mainstream fandom's engagement with Hank as a character. It's literally just such basic bitch shit. There's so little attempt to actually engage with what he is beyond the surface.

He's either a cuddly doctor who exists as five lines in a hurt/comfort fic, or he's fucking Satan himself because people's memories don't go back before 2019, and it makes me wonder sometimes why I bother trying to talk to people outside of my small, curated sphere here, because the majority of fandom will see one panel on Twitter, or Reddit, and form a fuckass opinion based on it, and then I have to act like it's somehow worth engaging with.

Where's the exploration of Hank as a trans metaphor? Where's the examination of Hank as a lens through which to view changing politics and the popular conceptualisation of intellectuals? Where's the thesis on why Hank is a sex symbol on the Avengers but he's a mopey bastard on the X-Men? Where's the discourse that actually bothers to question what Abigail represents on his narrative journey, and why they worked as a couple, and why she's important?

I just get so tired of the mainstream X-Men fandom sometimes. It legitimately feels like they have a head full of fuckin' bricks, and all it takes is jangling some keys in front of them to get them excited.

The people I have following and interacting with me here, you guys? You guys, I can have an actual conversation with, and I appreciate you more and more and more every time I dip my toe into Twitter and Reddit.

Rant over. Thanks for sticking with me. 💙

[moeitsu]

Since it's pride month I wanna talk about something I've noticed in the Red Dead Redemption fandom:

The Bisexual erasure of Sadie Adler and Arthur Morgan.

I apologize if this comes across as harsh, but it's something that's been on my mind since I started interacting w/ this media. And as a bisexual, I wanted to discuss it further.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with shipping these characters with the same sex. Personally, I am a Charthur shipper till the day I die. I don't ship Sadie with anyone but her husband, but I still enjoy seeing the fanart and headcanons of the women she's shipped with.

That being said, these characters are not lesbian or gay. That's literally a fact, and if you think otherwise it is bisexual erasure.

Let's start with Sadie Adler. Her entire character arc is getting revenge on the O'Driscolls for killing her husband. Whom she mourns for years, and talks about frequently with Arthur/other camp members. Now, if you want to ship her w/ Abigail or Molly or whomever, go for it!! But she has loved and still loves her husband. She is not a lesbian, and she didn't just magically turn into a lesbian after Jake's death. If she had any love interests other than Jake, this would make her bisexual. (even Sapphic is still a more appropriate term than lesbian)

The same goes for women in real life who have dated men first, then dated a woman. Just because their current partner is the same sex doesn't mean we can assume they are suddenly lesbian. Calling characters lesbians even if they have been in a relationship with men before is bisexual erasure.

This same concept is applied to Arthur Morgan. He had previous relationships with women. (one of whom he still has strong feelings for) and he is attracted to women. We see this with his greeting dialogue and when he compliments people. I believe Arthur's character is more likely to be bisexual than Sadie's, given his interactions w/ some of the men in the game. But that doesn't erase the fact that he's still attracted to the opposite sex. Arthur is not a gay man. Disregarding his past relationships w/ women is a form of bisexual erasure.

There is a huge double standard here because if these character's were actually lesbian/gay and the fandom decided to ship them with people of the opposite sex (i.e headcanon they are bi), there would be a major discourse.

Whenever bisexual women and men are presented in the media I always notice a few things:

Bi women are "secretly straight"

Bi women "don't know their lesbian yet"

Bi men are "secretly gay"

As well as this funny little graphic below ↓

Like I said before, I am bisexual. And if I'm being honest this years pride month has been exhausting and mildly infuriating with how the community seems to disregard bisexuals in a hetero relationship.

I stopped talking about my bisexuality with people because once they know I have been in a committed relationship with a man for seven years, I am suddenly excluded from the conversation.

I've had ex-friends tell me that I only identify as bisexual to "fit in" with the queer community. I've had people in college assume I was lesbian bc of the way I dressed, and then try to tell me that I must be secretly lesbian when I tell them I'm Bi. (Ppl also assumed I was non-binary bc of the way I presented but that's another story)

This stuff doesn't just happen to fictional characters, it happens to real people every single day. I'm honestly tired of ppl saying "well my headcanon doesn't hurt anybody, they're not real." Yes it does!! You are supporting Bi erasure!!

That's all I'm gonna say on this topic for now. I'd love to leave it open for discussion, but please be nice. This isn't a call-out or me trying to antagonize the queer rdr community. I just wanted to get it off my mind.

[drizzledrawings]

When people say that Mary is manipulative it makes me pause a little

Did she ask Arthur multiple times for help? Yeah. Did she ask him specifically cause of his skill set and his relationship with her? Of course. Do I think it was malicious? Absolutely not!! Mary is a flawed character just like everyone else in the story. She loved Arthur sure, but he’s an outlaw, being with him would ultimately put herself and her younger brother in danger. She is hyper aware of that. It makes sense that she has complicated feelings towards him and feels like because of their history she can still call upon him to help

Arthur is manipulated by many characters in the story who are far worse than Mary (DUTCH). Arthur loved her, and in Saint Denis he wanted to go with her, she wanted to run away with him. There was no manipulation there, if Arthur didn’t feel this great responsibility towards the gang, if he wasn’t so deep into the cult like following of Dutch, I think he would’ve gone

Idk the amount of discourse and hatred when it comes to the very few important women in rdr makes me angry. Wether it’s saying Mary is manipulative, Sadie is annoying, or villainizing abigail for her past prostitution, it all feels very wrapped up in misogyny

[junosmindpalace]

i find discourse around the rdr women so...fascinating and infuriating at the same time. because a lot of the time it doesn't seem like rdr fans want to apply the same level of complex analysis to the women like they do for the men, but when they do, it still doesnt seem all that well-intentioned or that it does right by their characters.

this is a very long analysis/spam/defense so be warned :,)

even though the majority of sadie's character revolves around the fact she not only lost her home and her husband and was thrust into a new life of crime, but was actively struggling with robberies BEFORE the events of the game, people instead choose to focus on whether or not she had feelings for arthur or whether he actions in the game were actually impactful. she helped saved abigail and john when no else would, she fought alongside the men against the army, she helped john set up a stable life, she helped rob the payroll train, helped ensure colm’s death, she fought alongside arthur TIME AGAIN and took over in a leadership role when half the gang was absent in the guarma chapter. to say that she did nothing more except “be badass” undermines all of these contributions to the story that she was either at the forefront of or helped bring to fruition.

in my opinion, abigail is the EASIEST character to defend out of any of the women, and yet somehow she receives the most backlash from dudebros. I lose ten braincells every time i have to read a theory post over whether or not she slept with other camp members besides john, whether or not she was a rat, and about how much shes a nag. the woman has not known a moment's rest in her entire life. by the age of eight she was working in a cathouse. she was a child prior to then scrapping whatever money she could earn at her young age in saloons and dive bars as a woman and child just to survive as a orphan. jack's birth was clearly not planned, and she has voiced multiple times her grievances at the circumstances of his upbringing. everything she does is for a better life for her son: a life she never had. her constant nagging to get john to man up and be a father is for her son's benefit, not her own. she even says so herself when she tells him that she doesn't mind if a relationship between them doesn't work out, but to at least try being there for jack. she can't work a job because she is a mother living a life of crime and danger; she can't afford to leave the camp and her son unsupervised. she still does her share around camp. why would anyone blame her for not wanting to return to a life that has made her miserable, especially now that she has a child who she wants to model a good life for? many people seem to somehow also forget that she herself was a child when she gave birth to jack; only 17-18. she is 22 in the game in a bad situation with the father of her child and financially. she is doing her best to raise her son when she is not fully equipped to do so. how can anyone even blame her for being skeptical of john when hes affectionate in the epilogue when for so long hes been distant? she does not even ask much of john--just to be there for him sometimes, and to live honestly. she is also incredibly kindhearted. comforting other women in the camp, offering a listening ear, taking care of john when hes injured. she puts in her share of effort when it comes to finding a job in the epilogue and maintaining beechers hope.

molly is a young woman who is presumably incredibly far from her home where her family is, and trying to navigate a way of life completely unfamiliar to her. her stuck up nature comes not only from the way she was raised, but also dutch's uplifting affection and presumed lovebombing in the early stages of their relationship. shes even been suggested to be somewhat sociable until dutch and her became somewhat of an official item, in which she grew somewhat of a bigger ego with a mentality that she was his right hand. she deeply depended on dutch for her stability in every way, and its evident in her eventual spiral. she hated being seen as weak and pitiful as somewhat of an outsider among outsiders. she seemed to be close to no one besides dutch, who repeatedly cut her off when she attempted to talk to him about her growing feelings of anxiety, paranoia and sadness. the loss of the one thing that had built her up, coupled with immense tragedy she just wasnt used to, and desperate for a semblance of respect and dignity that she had presumably been all too accustomed to, of course she was going to come off brash and confront dutch about his distant, high and mighty attitude. it's why by the end, she doesnt care if she is killed: there is nothing left for her. karen's comment about her pretending to rat them out for the sake of attention is also interesting in terms of their relationship and parallels, which i dont see ANYONE talk about.

karen very clearly struggles with...a lot. she has even said so herself when talking with molly. she struggles to accept help, evident in pieces of dialogue where she brushes off concerned gang members about her drinking (mary-beth, arthur, javier), and when she seems somewhat ashamed and embarrassed having to have been rescued by arthur in the valentine mission (SAYING EXPLICITLY "i dont much like being saved"). she struggles with believing people have good intentions/feelings toward her, illustrated in the way she's constantly rejecting sean, yet seemingly disappeared further down the bottle after his death, and her conversation with mary beth and tilly about the world having no equal and fair place for women. her negative experiences in the world as a woman could also influence her view of the world, perhaps being why she finds herself somewhat hostile toward feminist mindsets and why she, for a while, enjoyed the outlaw lifestyle: it was her little slice of freedom. her hatred for the rich can also be because she has experiences as a poor woman, perhaps some direct experiences in which rich people have negatively impacted her life. though molly and karen don't get along through most of the game, karen actually tries to step in and help her near the end, and its this action + defending her after her death that shows she was sympathetic toward her situation and on some level able to relate to it, both craving some kind of love beyond superficial things.

@/cryptidcr3ature said it very well in a post i reblogged recently: mary is essentially "her brother's keeper and her father's caretaker". she herself lives somewhere middle class with traditional notions of the time impacting her views on arthur's lifestyle and anything below those middle class standards being deemed as socially unacceptable (which is evident from the very first letter mary sends to arthur, in which she seems confused on what a polite term would be to refer to prostitutes, who were obviously thought very lowly of in the time). i also don't think its fair to criticise her condemnation of arthur's lifestyle when pretty much all audiences, contemporary and not, including members of the gang, acknowledge that it isnt anything pretty. killing is not fun. running from the law is not fun. mary was not only influenced by her father's views of arthur (a person that, despite being horrible, she still deeply loves), but looking after her own family, herself, and arthur's wellbeing when she ended their relationship + suggested they run away. she had given him an opportunity at compromise. perhaps the first time, scared and unfamiliar with his lifestyle, she had offered arthur an ultimatum: her or his outlaw life, but later was willing to also leave behind her brother and father, two figures that tie her down and make her life more miserable than need be despite loving them very much, in order to settle somewhere with arthur and start over. her asking for arthur's help comes from a place of desperation and excuse to allow herself some semblance of stability when she hadn't had it; at least not since her mother and husband passed. if arthur refuses to help her, she is incredibly understanding and sympathetic. she does not lash out. if arthur does help, she is immensely grateful, and even tries to bond with him despite their years apart.

this post isnt to excuse some of their more negative behaviours and aspects of their characters'-- but im saying that they deserve to be fairly treated and analyzed just like any of the rdr men. many of them are young. many of them have unique challenges as women. that isn’t to say the men have it easier, but their struggles and less prettier aspects of their characters are always met with more sympathy than the women. why do arthur and john get passes as reformed absent fathers and criminals? why does sean receive sympathy when karen rejects his pushy advances? why does hosea get a pass at being better than dutch when he still groomed younger members of the gang for a life of crime alongside dutch? why does dutch get a pass by having his downfall be justified by tough circumstances? lets just be fair

[bubbl3s-dot-jpg]

I need more Half A Soul discourse. Here are my headcanons, please argue with me about them

Dora adopts things randomly when left to her own devices. If she doesn't see Elias for more than 12 consecutive hours, there's a 25% chance she'll show up with a lost animal or child or trinket

Dora is so used to code switching that she will regularly talk in Abagail's accent if they speak for longer than a few minutes

Elias and Dora have one (1) biological child and they regularly forget which of their children he is because they have so many

Abigail comes home every Sunday to help Dora with the children. She doesn't believe in God, but she loves her mom and it's an opportunity to be around her, even tho they're herding orphans like cats

Vanessa throws one a ball every year around Dora and Elias' anniversary. She insists they come so they get the opportunity to dance with each other that they'd normally avoid

Elias regularly forgets to eat or drink when he's working. He passes this habit onto Abigail

Stimulants like coffee and chocolate really agree with Dora in the same way they do for some ADHD people. It allows her to become more externally expressive, but she crashes hard after

[thesmuttygazette]

abigail gasps softly, her body trembling at the feel of tanner’s hands moving over her skin, his touch lighting a fire deep within her. the way his lips trail over her neck sends shivers down her spine, her pulse quickening as his kisses grow more insistent, more possessive. she arches into him as his tongue strokes her lip, melting against his body as he pulls her thighs towards him. every movement, every whisper makes her dizzy with need, but there’s a gentleness in the way he handles her that keeps her grounded—like she’s the only thing in the world that matters to him in this moment.

her breath hitches as he settles between her legs, and a soft whimper escapes her lips when his fingers ghost over her clit, teasing her through the thin fabric. the sensation is overwhelming, pleasure dancing through her with every subtle touch. ❛ tanner… ❜ she breathes, her voice soft, pleading, wanting him to keep going but needing him to slow down all at once.

she feels the restraint in him, the way he’s holding himself back, & it sends a warm flush through her chest. he’s always so careful with her, always so focused on her needs, & it makes her heart ache with affection. when he lowers himself down, she can’t help the sharp intake of breath that escapes her. his lips on her swollen clit make her hips jerk in response, the feeling almost too intense to bear.

when he pulls her panties away & tosses them aside, the anticipation nearly undoes her. she meets his eyes as he hikes her leg over his shoulder, her breath shaky, her body humming with desire. the moment his mouth presses against her entrance, her head falls back against the pillow, & a low moan slips from her lips. his name tumbles from her in a breathless gasp as his tongue works her, the sensation of him between her legs too good, too perfect.

❛ oh my god, ❜ she breathes, her hands fisting the sheets beneath her. the way he groans against her only drives her higher, the vibrations from his voice sending jolts of pleasure through her. ❛ tanner… please, ❜ she whimpers, her voice catching as he delves deeper, his mouth working magic that has her teetering on the edge already. every nerve in her body feels like it’s on fire, & all she can focus on is the way he feels against her, the way he tastes her like she’s something he can’t get enough of.

her fingers thread into his hair, tugging gently as her body tightens beneath him, her hips rocking forward to meet his mouth. ❛ don’t stop, ❜ she manages to whisper, her voice shaking as the pressure builds inside her, overwhelming and intoxicating all at once.

closed for my gumdrop @thesmuttygazette .

" you should be treated like this all the time, " he murmurs as he runs his hands up her body, aiming to lose himself in the curves of her frame. his lips trail kisses up her neck and jaw before he strokes her lesser lip with his tongue and kisses her deeply, grabbing her thighs and yanking them gently towards him as he uses the weight of his upper half to guide her back onto the bed.

" just relax, baby, " tanner encourages between kisses, shifting himself out from under her and settling her on the mattress as he lays himself between her legs and gently ghosts his fingertips against her clit through the fabric of her panties. every moment is an exercise in restraint, his urges sometimes more animal than man - but he would still himself for her. he would find a way to be what she needed.

keeping eye contact with her, he lowers himself down and groan as he kisses her swollen clit and then loops his fingers through the fabric to pry it away. once free of her ankles he tosses it aside, winding one strong arm around her thigh and hiking it up onto his shoulder as he dips his head down to nudge his nose against her entrance, the smell and taste of her arousal sending him reeling as he opens his mouth and delves his tongue into her sweet, glistening cunt. " abi .. " he groans against her, " you taste so fucking good. "

[mxcrayon]

whenever i see stupid hannibal opinions/discourse i make myself feel better by imagining it happening in-universe, because the entire show is so publicized through not only the continuing tattlecrime but also after hannibal's arrest you KNOW it wasn't only those two writing about him, there was definitely a deep dive into his past and his associates by the true crime girlies, universities were holding lectures analyzing his psychology and there were podcasts about him

"omg hannibal and abigail were so romantic with each other" "who do you think hannibal would pick between bedelia and will?" "hannibal would so defend rapists lol" will graham would hate your ass

just picture him reading this shit silently in bed next to his wife and shaking with rage yet unable to hold a strong opinion because he's supposed to be over this shit