#anti is here again

[the3rddenialist]

Major Spoilers for The Somewhat Incredible Jackie-Boy Man #0 and the what has been revealed for #1

Theorising/thoughts about Void Silver's final page and what might happen in #1 or future

My Void Silver one is here

Apologies again about the quality

Very brief notes about each aspect of the final page in the Somewhat Incredible Jackie-Boy Man

[valyrfia]

am I incredibly cynical if I say that him and McLaren PR have noticeably doubled down on Lando’s struggles with mental health since his general misguided cockiness has radicalised a majority of the F1 community against him or

[gummi-ships]

Kingdom Hearts 3 - Rage Form

[lokiiied]

ngl i got so scared they were gonna make mobius a fucking white picket fence two kids and a loving wife…and then they gave us “single dad” mobius “wife is long gone” hmm you’re really my friend? okay i ain’t arguing with a tall, handsome, dark haired stranger guess i’ll just follow you anywhere.

and then i was happy bc sylvie is so happy in her life!! by herself!!

and THEN i got so scared when loki & sylvie went for a drink and i was like alright here we go…and then i got “of course i know you. your friends are where they’re supposed to be. we’re writing our own stories. write your own.” and “i want my friends. i don’t want to be alone”

and then i was happy again bc she left to go listen to records!! and the record shop guy is cute! maybe she thought so. maybe not! she’s just vibing!!

and then i got, “it’s about who” while staring right at mobius.

what a fucking rollercoaster.

[angel-maybe-alive]

Retelings cliches that piss me the fuck off

♡Alice in Wonderland is about drugs - it could be about society, it could be about neurodivergency but no, white girl doing LSD is cooler, I guess.

♡ what if Superman was evil - then it wouldn't be Superman dumbass, like the main point of Superman is that he is a good person like it's the whole deal hyperpowerful but really good

♡actually any what if the heroes had no morals- then you are just doing Greek myths with extra steps

♡Romeo and Juliet, but one is an oppressor and the other the oppressed - Litterally, both families were in equal standing in society. Why you need to make it abusive for no reason.

♡Beauty and the beast, any reteling of beauty and the beast - no, it's not Stockholm syndrome, no a shapeshifter elf with abs doesn't count as a Beast, and Belle was a nice person In the original why everyone remakes her as a cunt.

♡my book it's just like the hunger games but...-Shut it I need you to please tell me if you understand that no, hunger games isnt just about reality television and a battle royale, I swear to God...

♡Pinocchio but it's about a robot- flower print for spring groundbreaking

♡it's inspired by the works of tolkien- no, it's a transcript of you and your group of only male friends playing dungeons and dragons while high on cheap weed at 03:00 am on the suburbs while listening to pop punk on MTV in 2003, we get it you want to bang a hot elven maiden and slain a dragon

♡is inspired by Harry potter- For the last fucking time Rowling doesn't own the concept of magic schools let go of those fucking chains and let this woman go it's a magic school book just call it that goddamn it

♡it's inspired by fairy tales - Disney version or the cultural ones because one way or the other, your childhood crush on an animated villain shouldn't be the only thing fueling your writing career.

♡it's about Greek gods...-*sigh* I don't even know where to start with those just read something other than Percy Jackson(I love percy Jackson by the way) Lore Olympus and the first page of Wikipedia on Greek mythology and then maybe spend a long time thinking if whatever you are planning to write isn't somehow more misogynistic than whatever the fuck an old Greek scholar wrote thousands of years ago okay.

♡what if (real life bigotry) was reverse - just don't for a first time writing, for someone in a privileged place in society, it's just a bad idea altogether, Dont

[proficgen]

being an anti must be so stressful like, imagine shipping two characters and then the creator reveals they’re actually related?

Like what do you do??? stop shipping them??? fr?????

What if it turns out that the other character is actually toxic, you gonna just drop all the fanfics and stuff like that?? really?? on god?????

[lainalit]

I know feyre lies in bed getting eaten out by rhysand and thinks to herself "Tamlin was better at this"

[danny-chase]

Not to be obsessed over one moment in canon but Bruce's words here kill me every time i read them

The New Titans #55

Specifically, "He was just like you." Comics went a long ways after this to assure readers Tim was #notliketheothergirls (Jason) by continually contrasting him to Jason and pointing out how different they were. But comics rarely talked about how Dick and Jason were very similar characters, and how they went through similar arcs - starting out as perfect boy scout role model kids, and growing discontent and angry with Bruce's ways and not being people he could control. It ended very differently for them, but it could have ended the same, if Joker's aim had been dead on. In universe, who lives and who died seemed to come down to chance, and I'm obsessed with Dick thinking that it should have been him

[formulanni]

Watching Norris fans preemptively copy the iconic Charles winning monza speech in Instagram comments I hate it here

[sade-alicious]

The Wheelclair Argument (1x05)

watching the show the first couple times around i thought that mike got upset out of defense for el. but when rewatching this time, i realized mike got upset because lucas was losing hope on finding will. thats what made mike angry. the fact that they werent actually closer to finding will.

at first when lucas says el's been playing them, mike deny's it because he thinks that el's been helping them find will. el's importance to mike in the first season is to find will; to reconnect mike with his best friend. mike has no issue leaving el when he thinks that will died, and he had no issue using her again to find will when he thinks will's still alive (and I don't recall any scene of him apologizing to el for how he treated her during the quarry scene.)

secondly, we don't see mike defending el out of personal interest throughout this scene. in fact, when lucas says how el used the party, or when he claims that mike is blind because el isn't grossed out by him, mike doesn't look particularly angry or mad. even when lucas shouts in his face to “wake the hell up.”

but you know when we do see mike get ticked off? when lucas says that el is letting will die in the UD. that moment is what made mike get majorly pissed off, even more than he was beforehand. hell, there's even a whole beat after lucas yells in mike's face. mike doesn't get defensive over el, he get's defensive over will, and the fact that they do have hope in finding him.

when we look at when mike decides to speak up, it's not really to defend el's position. the closest we get is when he says "screw you." but there are many other moments where lucas spews things about el that mike says nothing about. but the moment lucas suggests that will could be dying, mike yells at him. he can't bear the possibility that he'd have to grieve will's death again. even when we examine camera angles, it shows mike's reaction to lucas saying that mike is blinded by el not being grossed out by him, and the reaction to him saying that will could be dying.

and at the end of the scene, when mike yells at el. “what is wrong with you!?” if mike was defending el while arguing with lucas, then wouldn't he show at least a bit of concern for her and how she feels? which also leads me to believe that when he was looking for el after lucas stormed off, it was because he still had hope for finding will, and as far as they knew: el was their only hope.

[geegers22]

Just saw someone call zutara a crack ship…

I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

[the-way-astray]

The Keefe Sencen Infantilization Argument (because I've seen people say that saying he infantilizes Sophie is a bad-faith argument):

(Note: This post is a repost. I had my thoughts scattered out over a few posts, so I wanted to put them all together in one cohesive post. If you've already seen all the original posts, then aside from like two sentences being reworked and the format being better now, there's like nothing new here for you. Sorry.)

Examples of Keefe infantilizing Sophie and my explanations as to why this is infantilization and not okay:

Lodestar, chapter 4. What I originally said: “There you go, rocking the whole adorable-when-you’re-angry thing. I think that’s what I’ve missed about you the most.” Keefe infantilizes Sophie by saying she’s cute when she’s angry. She is trying to express her feelings, and all Keefe can do is be all Awwwwww. Isn’t that so cute? She’s angry! How adorable. It’s a form of invalidating someone’s feelings, by treating them like they’re just entertainment or by brushing them off like that. It’s some of the most manipulative behavior out there. It also saves Keefe from having to actually take Sophie’s feelings into account. His infantilization of her also shows up in his incessant need to protect her. It’s icky and gross, and authors should stop encouraging this behavior.

Sophie and Keefe are having a mental conversation and Keefe starts talking about Sophie's love triangle/square situation and Sophie doesn't want to talk about it. Not a fan of this, because Keefe butts into Sophie's personal business, then when she gets worked up, he heavily implies that he thinks it's cute. But this one isn't particularly bad compared to the others. Don't get me wrong, I still think this is infantilization, but the best I can say about it is it's not the worst example.

Lodestar, chapter 46. What I originally said: “You’re so cute when you worry, he told her.” More classic Keefe infantilization. He once again invalidates Sophie’s feelings by dumbing them down and acting like they’re this cute, quirky, inconsequential thing.

Sophie is obviously incredibly worried. Keefe clearly knows this. And his comment is to be like Yeah, but don't you know that makes you sooooo cute??? Like, sir.

Lodestar, chapter 65. What I originally said: “Is this going to be another one of those nights where you spend the whole time yelling at me to come home? Keefe asked, making her sit up straighter as his thoughts filled her head. Because as much as I love it when you get all feisty on me, now’s really not a good time.” God, Keefe is so subtly invalidating. He treats Sophie like she’s just his personal worry machine, not a person with valid concerns and ideas. The flippant way he talks about her worry for him makes me so mad. He takes her worry for granted and throws it back in her face, without a care for how it would affect her mental health. He brushes her off and invalidates her because he thinks he’s so much smarter than everyone else. Not to mention he calls her worry “feisty” and further infantilizes her feelings and ideas.

This one honestly stands alone. Context doesn't really do anything to it. The infantilization for all these quotes is in the quote itself, because it is invalidating to treat someone's outburst of negative emotions as entertainment. Keefe basically just says that he finds it cute when she insists he comes home because she's worried about him??? He's like, yeah, Sophie's worried about me, tearing up her mental health over me, but like. She gets feisty when that all becomes externalized and she begs me to come home! Again, it's just a way he's able to brush Sophie's feelings off and disregard her opinion entirely.

When I say Keefe acts like Sophie is his personal worry machine, I'm saying he acts like her worry only exists for his amusement. He doesn't see the deeper feelings behind that worry (or if he does, he certainly doesn't respect them), and only see it for what he sees it as: something cute and adorable.

Nightfall, chapter 24. What I originally said: “‘I know! Our little girl is growing up and getting so snarky!’ Keefe pretended to wipe his teary eyes. ‘I’ve never been so proud.’” “Our little girl” . . . that totally isn’t creepy or infantilizing at all. The way Keefe talks about Sophie here is genuinely so gross, even if it is a joke. 

This is a joke. 100%. But it's a joke that sat very poorly with me because of the way Keefe verbalizes this. The problem for me is in the quote itself, again, because I feel like saying these sorts of things constantly is just so weird.

Nightfall, chapter 32. Wouldn't say what I originally said adds anything new, so I'm just gonna move past that. The larger problem here is 100% the fact that Keefe is clearly trying to joke to deflect Sophie's anger away. My argument isn't about that. My argument is that saying that someone's anger is adorable is textbook infantilization. In context, Keefe uses it as a way to deflect or joke. But the simple act of saying that is a form of invalidation where Sophie's emotions are made out to be some silly, inconsequential thing.

Anyway, about this quote in particular. Sophie is obviously freaking out, and she is clearly and seriously trying to tell him that his joking behavior is unacceptable. Keefe responds, not by listening at all to what Sophie said or what she's feeling, but by instead saying this. This invalidates Sophie's very real feelings as well as saves Keefe from having to confront what Sophie's telling him. And yes, this is a product of his deflection, but my point here is that saying someone's anger or worry is adorable or cute when they are trying to be serious is textbook infantilization, because it treats that opinion they have as a silly, child-like tantrum. "Awwww, isn't that anger adorable???" is what you say about a tantrum-throwing toddler who just got their favorite toy taken away, not someone your age presenting a valid, serious opinion. My issue is with the statement "Your anger/worry is adorable/cute" itself, not how Keefe uses it to deflect. It also presents Keefe, subtle as it may be, as the only one with valid opinions on things because Sophie's adorable little feelings get in the way of her rationality.

And before you say Sophie calls him out on this, yes, but he doesn't change. I'm not going to talk about it at length here, but Keefe apologizes to Sophie in the Nightfall scene after his bed rest more out of a desire to make up with her than a desire to change his bad habits. You can see this because he continues to do it into Unlocked.

Nightfall, chapter 34. Again, I don't think what I originally said adds anything relevant, so I'll skip that here.

The famous scene. I do admit that Sophie calls Keefe out this time. However, as I've already said, this doesn't stick, so it hardly matter. Keefe continues with this behavior through the series and into Unlocked, where he doesn't necessarily say these things out loud, but you can see he still thinks them.

Nightfall, chapter 70. What I originally said: “‘Much as I’m enjoying this sudden overflow of adorable Foster-rage—it’s not worth it.’” Ah, more of Keefe infantilizing Sophie and invalidating her feelings. If someone finds your anger or worry “adorable” and acts like it’s this cute little quirk, then that’s never a good thing. Especially if they enjoy it. Someone who cares about you should never enjoy seeing you angry or worried.

Sophie's having a serious, key word here is serious, discussion (we'll call it a discussion, even though that's not particularly correct) with Cassius, and even though her rage isn't aimed at him this time, Keefe telling Sophie her rage is adorable when she's being serious is still dumbing down her emotions to that of a toddler throwing a tantrum, not a grown-up (at least relative to Keefe) having a very valid reason to be angry. Just because he agrees with her anger, doesn't mean he can't still infantilize her.

Flashback, chapter 1, page 12. I think what I said in my original post just about sums it up: “‘You’re so adorable when you worry. I’ve told you that, right?’” (12) Yes, you have, and saying it more doesn’t make it any less icky and gross and infantilizing. It’s like he’s dumbing Sophie down to this object who only exists to entertain him with her adowabuw wittle feewings, instead of a person with very real, very complex emotions.

Keefe fans the air, so we have physical evidence he knows exactly how worried Sophie is. And his response is to be like, so cute! So adorable! Once again, this is serious, and Keefe is acting like Sophie's worry exists only to amuse or entertain him. I don't know else to communicate that that isn't a good thing. Someone being worried usually means they have something they're worrying about, worry doesn't just manifest out of thin air for entertainment's sake. Sophie also responds poorly to his writing her off, with what and the glare and all.

(Side note: When I was looking for that quote, I found a quote where Fitz says the exact same thing, I'm talking word-for-word "adorable when you worry" stuff. Like I mentioned in my disclaimers, I'm not saying he's more right for this and I'm not letting him off the hook. It's icky when Keefe does it and it's icky when Fitz does it. But I'm solely focused on Keefe, which is why I'm not bringing that up. It's also worth it to note that Fitz doesn't say this over and over again, the way Keefe does.)

Flashback, chapter 17, page 304. I think I'm just going to copy-paste exactly what I said in my original post because it's exactly what I'm trying to say: “‘Hear that, Ro?’ he interrupted. ‘She’s giving me her serious voice.’” (304) Another example of Keefe infantilizing Sophie and dumbing her feelings down for the sake of a joke. Awwww, isn’t her serious voice so cute? She only does that when she thinks she has something important to say to us grown-ups! Awwwwwww. 

Apparently, people don't get why this is a bad thing, so: acting like someone isn't being serious when you can literally feel their emotions and know they're being serious just because you don't like what they're saying is not just invalidation, but infantilization, because you are dumbing their emotions and the complexities behind them down to that of a child attempting to be serious.

I'd also argue that this shows Keefe's true colors: he only really listens to her opinions and respects them when he agrees with them. Disagreeing with someone is all fine and good, but you can still respect the other person's opinion and not dumb it down and act like it's lesser than your own. If Keefe said "Sophie, I hear you, but I think you're wrong" (in Keefe jokester language, obviously, not word-for-word what I wrote) then I wouldn't call this infantilization, I'd call it respect. My problems arise from when Keefe acts like Sophie's opinions are stupid because Sophie is the one saying them with that adorable little pouty voice.

Flashback, chapter 21, page 355. What I originally said: “It’s always fun when you get feisty.” (355) I’ve said this about a gajillion times, but Keefe’s infantilization of Sophie is so horrific, it’s like he doesn’t care about her at all. He just sees her emotions as amusement for himself.

This is a sad scene, and Keefe has every right to be emotionally . . . off in this scene. But it still doesn't change the fact that he calls Sophie's anger "feistiness" and then says it's fun when she gets angry. You could say that's not exactly what he said, but it's likely that's what he meant given the past few quotes I've shown. Keefe has demonstrated a pattern of thinking Sophie's anger is amusing or adorable or fun. Anger is a negative emotion. When Sophie feels anger she doesn't feel good. And Keefe is like, yeah, but it's cute! Do you see how that's not the greatest thing to say? It says a lot about his internalized beliefs about Sophie, and is essentially confirmed by Unlocked. And even if that didn't represent the way he saw Sophie inside, that's still a really shitty thing to say because it still carries the invalidation.

Legacy, chapter 3, page 70. What I originally said: “‘Tell me why you have that cute little crease between your eyebrows.’” (70) You already know what I’m going to say. Keefe finding Sophie’s worry cute is textbook infantilization. But also, if he finds her worry and anger so adorable, what’s he gonna do when the Neverseen are defeated and Sophie doesn’t have as many things worrying her?

So, the crease between the eyebrows is obviously because of worry. So by saying he finds it cute, Keefe indirectly says he finds Sophie's worry cute, though I'm sure I don't have to spell that out because he's already flat out admitted he finds Sophie's worry cute several times. I'm going to sound like a broken record if I repeat what I've been saying this entire post about why this is infantilization, so instead I wanna talk about that last paragraph there. Keefe literally knows how queasy Sophie's worry can make her sometimes, and he has expressed this before, as well. So he knows exactly what Sophie's going through when she worries. And still, he acts like her worry is amusing, funny, cute, or otherwise a quirky little thing. I don't understand how Keefe can be so invalidating, having had firsthand experience with Sophie's emotions.

“But I was only half listening because she gets this cute little crinkle between her eyebrows when she’s trying to be serious, and it makes me want to reach up and smooth her forehead with my fingertip—and I’m betting she’d think I was super weird if I did that, since it’s not like she’s my . . . ” (Unlocked, very first paragraph of Keefe's diary entry, 481)

Don't have an e-book of Unlocked, unfortunately (boooooooo). So the context is that Keefe is giving us (or himself???) an intro to what he's doing here, which is writing about his drawings. He explains that Sophie gave him the idea and gives a general overview of what she said to convince him. Then he says this quote.

Here's what I said, which I stand by: I hate the way Keefe talks about Sophie. She’s just this soft, kind of ditzy, child-like sort of figure in his head. He admits that he doesn’t care what she has to say, he just cares about how adorable she looks while she says it. This is a textbook sign of a toxic relationship. You should care about what your partner/crush says, because that shows that you see them as a person, not as your personal cover model. Also “trying to be serious” paints Sophie as this impudent little child who’s trying to get the attention of the older, more experienced adults and it very much implies that Sophie is not serious, but awwww, look how cute she looks trying to be serious, isn’t it adorable? Except Keefe and Sophie are the same age. So this is another case of textbook infantilization.

Personally, I think I made it fairly clear why I think this is infantilization. Keefe did not listen to the latter half of what Sophie said because he was too busy imagining how adorable she must've looked as she said it. I don't know how to make it more clear that Keefe does not respect or care about Sophie's opinions. He did what she asked, sure, but he did not actually listen to her. Again, implying Sophie was not being serious when she was is infantilization. It takes away the weight of what Sophie is saying and makes it out to be a thing of like, Oh well, Sophie told me to, so I guess I'll humor her adorable little wishes and give it a shot, but let's get back to what's more important here, which is how cute she probably looks! I don't know how else to explain that that's not an attitude you want in someone who claims to listen to you and respect you.

Addressing some other things (Keefe calling Sophie herself cute [1], Keefe's deflection [2], Keefe praising Sophie's prowess [3], Sophie not seeming bothered [4], and The Real Problem [5]):

I don't think Keefe calling Sophie herself cute or adorable by itself is infantilization. That's just a cute, fluffy teenage crush. 100% cool with that. My problem is with Keefe dumbing Sophie's negative emotions that have complexities behind them down to something cute or inconsequential by calling them adorable. There's a quote in the diary entries where Keefe describes Sophie's blush as adorable and proceeds to describe it in vivid detail. I don't like it for personal taste reasons, but I would never argue that this is infantilization. Because. It's not. There is no dumbing down of emotions here, no shrugging off experience or maturity. There's just a kid with a crush.

As for Keefe's habit of deflecting stuff through jokes, yes, it's a flaw and yes, some of the times Keefe infantilizes Sophie, he's using it as a joke to deflect. Yes, that's the larger issue. But the point still stands that the way in which he thinks of Sophie's worry and anger is infantilization.

There are moments where Keefe talks nonstop (sometimes in a very unnatural way, in my opinion) about how powerful and amazing and brilliant and talented and spectacular Sophie is and how he respects her choices and whatnot. I don't see this as particularly contradictory to his infantilization. Keefe can dumb Sophie's emotions down to cute, inconsequential little playthings while also insisting that he thinks she's amazing and powerful. I do think he does think that she's incredibly talented, but he also invalidates or disrespects her choices because he sees her emotions as adorable and unserious. Sophie is objectively powerful and talented and smart, I'm not really sure how saying those clear facts out loud changes the fact that Keefe still sees Sophie as very juvenile in his head. He can respect her prowess and capacity for talent while still disrespecting her opinions and emotions. The two can coexist. This is why I say Keefe pedestalizes and infantilizes Sophie simultaneously.

As for saying this doesn't bother Sophie (except in that one instance where she glares at him), I'd hardly say it matters. People can be the object of toxic behavior without realizing it. Sophie doesn't really seem to care past a handful of seconds when Keefe reads her emotions without her permission (on purpose, with intention), but I think most of us would agree that that doesn't make it acceptable. And Keefe's infantile views of Sophie say more about him than they do Sophie, which is the argument I'm trying to make. My point is that Keefe sees Sophie's emotions as inconsequential little things that don't need to be taken into account. This is all mapped into how he sees her internally. Again, just because Sophie doesn't seem bothered by Keefe's comments, doesn't mean they're acceptable, especially considering it gives us a view into the way he truly sees Sophie. And if Keefe thinks of Sophie is such an invalidating way, how are we supposed to believe he'll respect her when she argues with him, instead of just writing it off as "that adorable rage"?

And last but not least (as this is literally the reason people are annoyed with Keefe, regardless of what flaw you're talking about): the infantilization isn't the problem. Not really. What the problem is is that it is never called out by the narrative and when it is, it lasts two seconds, doesn't stick, and Keefe continues with it having not learned a thing. He doesn't change, and I can give you a thousand explanations for why Keefe may be so prone to infantilizing Sophie based on his childhood, trauma, and everything else, but none of that is an excuse. And I'm certainly not a fan of the way we're constantly told that Keefe respects Sophie when he's clearly so ready to undermine her emotions or dumb them down. If you're going to have him say things like this, it should be understandable that it's not a good thing.

I think it all comes down to this: Imagine you were trying to get a very serious point across to someone or otherwise feeling very emotional over something and then you look over and the other person's reaction is like, Aw, you're so cute when you're all worked up trying to be serious! Anger so adorable! Worry so cute! I love it when you get feisty! Wouldn't you feel like they don't respect what you're saying? Is that not incredibly icky and weird?

Here is the definition of infantilization. I think it's very difficult to make an argument that Keefe is not doing this to Sophie. And if you think that's bad, oh boy, is it so. Much. Worse. In the actual Unlocked novella. It's very difficult to deny that Keefe only sees Sophie as an adorable little cute thing that amuses him when you read it. But I'll get there . . .

Anyway I'm leaving it off with this because these are the vibes I get from Keefe every time he makes an infantilizing comment about Sophie (minus the yelling, Keefe doesn't really yell):

[valyrfia]

i think what's really funny is watching all the lando stans on twitter absolutely lose their shit over their driver getting team ordered and the charles fans are there like

[gwandas]

Alright, time to elaborate on that other post. Elain by far has had the most free will, the most agency out of the three sisters. Elain stans love to say Nesta coddles her when the reality is Nesta consistently relents to what Elain chooses for herself.

In ACOMAF, Nesta doesn't agree at first to Feyre's request to use their house because she doesn't want to compromise Elain's engagement. Elain is the one to push back, and Nesta relents immediately. What Nesta thinks is best doesn't take precedence over Elain's wants.

We know that Nesta doesn't approve of Greyson. She agrees with Cassian that Elain deserves better, but what Nesta thinks is best doesn't take precedence over Elain's wants.

In ACOWAR, Elain is catatonic. If anything, she should be coddled here. Her and Elain were stuck with these strangers for months. Strangers who were also the people who got them into that mess in the first place. Finally, Feyre shows up to help Nesta figure out how to help their sister. Madja is brought in, who recommends Lucien try to figure it out since they're mates. Nesta pushes back in what might arguably be coddling to keep Lucien from Elain. Feyre tells her to shut the fuck up and let Lucien try. And what do you know? She relents again -- What Nesta thinks is best is ignored because Nesta doesn't have any power in this situation.

In ACOFAS, Nesta has pushed Elain away at this point. She tells her “You have your life, I have mine." That's more or less Nesta saying do whatever tf you want Elain it's not my business. Not coddling!

In ACOSF, ohhh the infamous scene when Elain finally develops a personality starts coming out of her shell. Please try to remember at this point, Nesta has been locked in a house and barely sees Elain. The IC doesn't give a fuck about what Nesta wants for this whole book—Why would they choose now to listen to her? Literally everyone except Azriel agrees that Elain should be able to scry if she wants to. It would literally be easier for the IC to let Elain do it over waiting for Nesta who didn't want to do it.

"Shall I tend to my little garden forever?” When Nesta flinched, Elain said, “You can't have it both ways. You cannot resent my decision to lead a small, quiet life while also refusing to let me do anything greater."

Elain says all this and then... goes back to "tend to her little garden." It's a toothless moment. Elain stans would rather blame Nesta for coddling her than consider that maybe Elain just didn't try very hard to take on some responsibility for her sister who was supposed to be in "rehab." It sounds fucking stupid in the context that Elain hasn't seen Nesta at all between ACOFAS and ACOSF -- Nesta physically isn't around to coddle her. Elain doesn't contribute because she chooses not to or because the IC simply doesn't ask her to. We don't have any context for what she's been up to aside from some vague comments about lying about gardening or whatever Cassian said.

Amren admits that they're using Elain to manipulate Nesta. There was zero practical reason for them to do this other than because they care more about Elain's safety than Nesta's safety. The IC are the ones who have the power to "hold Elain back," not her sister who is locked in a house and never sees her—The IC could easily say fuck you to Nesta and have Elain do it. They didn't even need to bring Nesta into this conversation!! They could've gone to Elain first!!

Some Elain stans want so badly for Nesta to be the thing holding Elain back and it's very transparent to me. I have seen people go so far as to blame Nesta for Elain's uselessness in the cabin and that Nesta abused her too—sorry, what? I mean nice try, but Elain already admitted to being just as neglectful, and not even because she was genuinely remoseful towards Feyre—She said that shit to defend Nesta from Cassian.

I'm not even saying Elain isn't coddled but Nesta sure as fuck isn't the one doing it. Nesta doesn't even have her own free will how the fuck is she supposed to take away someone else's? Nesta choosing to do things so Elain doesn't have to isn't coddling. It's well established that if Nesta couldn't successfully scry, they would've gone to Elain, which means Nesta never had the power to stop Elain from scrying. Nesta has never tried to take away Elain's free will and even if she wanted to, she has no power to do that.

[la-pheacienne]

I just LOVE how both in got and hotd we have established that the root of all evil is women who *checks notes* enjoy sex! consistency is important right? I mean GOD FORBID we genuinely root for anyone that isn't nEd FuCKinG sTark the paragon of big dick masculine honor! who are we gonna root for? a flagrant philanderer that started the war because she's a whore? pwease

but at least they're criticizing monarchy you guyzzz hashtag anti war hashtag subversion!! definitely promising!! never been done before!!!

[boosyboo9206]

The one thing that I will never forgive Once Upon a Time for is killing off Neal.

Not because I'm a swanthief/swanfire shipper and wanted them together so bad. But because killing him off was complete and total fan service to pave the way for captain swan.

I'm not the biggest fan of captain swan because, honestly, they're a little toxic for each other. But, also, because Hook's only purpose after a season or two was only Emma.

At least, for Neal, he had other purposes. Henry's Dad. Rumple's son - literally his humanity and the whole reason Rumple did everything he did. He was friends with Belle. And Wendy. He had reasons to exist outside of Emma and could have completely moved on from her in time and find someone else.

They could have had a healthy co-parenting relationship and been friends. And, while it would have been nice to, at least, see them try a romantic relationship again, the time had totally passed. There's too much history and pain and things that happened for them to work. So her not wanting to try again with him and be with Hook could have still happened.

Killing off Neal was a copout and fan service and a terrible choice. They also totally ruined Hook by not giving him a purpose outside of Emma after/around, like, season 3.