#calypso discourse

[pineycone]

Dude, what even 😭😭😭 the mental gymnastics are insane, why is "lover unwilling, the other far too willing" strictly poetic now??

Also, does anyone know what passage this person is quoting? Bc i genuinely don’t remember any mention of odysseus "taking calypso to wife"?

*bangs head against the wall repeatedly* what the fuck kinda odyssey are these people reading

[telemachus-let-me-hit-it]

“Just because it’s Greek mythology doesn’t mean you can ship nasty things!”

Actually it does. Greek mythology is FULL of “nasty” relationships, incest, sex crimes and everything else but we’re chill with it because it’s well…mythology. In the same manner that you SHOULD be relatively chill with fictional stuff because that is also imaginary. Like the source material itself is worse lmao, it’s wild when a Greek mythos-based fandom ends up attracting so many easily offended and vanilla folk.

Antis learn to read the room I beg of you—

-modnote

Filthy frank photo if you’re cool

[bugwolfsstuff]

'Fandom misinterprets this character in the worst light because she's a woman' and 'Fandom misinterprets this character in the 'best' light because she's a woman and therefore a 'girl boss'' are statements that co-exist and I hate that they are present in both of my fandoms.

[theglassesgirl]

Calypso vs Antinous: A Tale of Two Villains

I know this is such a weird topic for me to come back for after not blogging for months, especially I’ve never spoken on this fandom here, as opposed to TikTok. But precisely BECAUSE tiktok is so limiting, even if you make various videos on a topic, someone won’t have all the context and the comment system of that app is pure ass so here I am

Calypso and Antinous are two (out of three!) of the MAJOR villains in the Wisdom Saga, however, both these villains have produced polarizing discourse that has fascinated yet confounded me. On Calypo’s end, she is a villain who many are made upset by when she is interpreted as the villain she is (in varying degrees). On Antinous’s end, he is a villain who many are made upset by when he is interpreted as anything BUT the villain he is (in various extremes). What on earth happened here?

I’ll try to dissect what has transpired as i have come to understand both situations.

PLEASE try to read through the end, but if you like, you are also more than welcome to just focus on one section if you don’t care for both discourses or how i think one affects the other. I totally get it. KEEP IN MIND, that i might speak about something you haven’t PERSONALLY seen, but as i often say in fandom, just because YOU didn’t see it, doesn’t mean it didn’t HAPPEN. It adds context to why/how certain fans are reacting as they are. You could be in one camp, and never have seen what the other camp has, so at any point where youre reading and saying to yourself “is this a thing that happened?” Consider that it did indeed, happen, and you are welcome to expand your knowledge on the subject.

ANY comments that go “you have no idea what your talking about/this isn’t true/i’ve never seen this/when did this happen(sarcastically)” will not be answered and you will be blocked, because it is clear you are not actually open to discussion. You’ve made up your mind about these characters and topics, and my time, at least, is valuable.

GENUINE questions like “I didn’t know this/when did this happen (genuine)/can you explain this point more” are more than welcome. I will absolutely entertain character interpretation as well, so long as we’re not trying to “convince” one another, as that isn’t the point of this post. These are two villains who i find fascinating and am wondering why are being treated so differently in discourse spaces.

For Calypso:

I truly and HONESTLY believe that because Calypso is a unique (and lovable! Mind you!) villain, it had led to many of her newer fans to feel uncomfortable with her role in the story. I have seen numerous sides of her discourse and have come with a few iron-clad rules: it is ONLY acceptable to call someone out if they are harassing Wangui, calypo’s VA (which has NOT happened as i am writing this out) OR if an anti-calypso comes into SOMEONE ELSE’s post saying anything like “if you like calypso then you condone her actions” because as what we sane people know, that is just a silly fallacy, OR if they start shit in a cosplayers/fanfic writer/fanartists comment section. ASIDE from these instances, i will be speaking on what none sense has transpired about how Calypso is portrayed in the Musical within her first song, and her future song, because BOTH have been used for utter bias.

A few things to debunk:

FIRST Calypso is NOT cursed to fall in love with anyone who comes across her island. That is a Percy Jackson ONLY addition that has no bearings on her actions in the musical or the original poem.

ALSO though Calypso CANONICALLY RAPES Odysseus for seven years in the original poem, the CHILDREN from that abuse only really exist in secondary sources/works. They NOT in the original poem.

Having said that:

The Ambiguity of Calypso’s actions in both of her songs means that everyone is right when they speculate on what she has done. Odysseus was trapped on her island against HIS will for seven years. He is canonically seen refusing her advances, trying to kill himself, and begging her to let him go and leave him alone. These are UNDISPUTED facts. As such, regardless of how YOU personally choose to interpret Calypso actions, she will always have a CANONICAL victim in the musical. I feel people are forgetting Odysseus when they speak on Calypso and that’s the whole point of her existence in the poem and the musical.

This leads directly into WHY there has been arguments about Calypso’s character. In the POEM, she very much sexually assaults Odysseus for seven long years. He is seen crying nightly and begging to be free. In the MUSICAL, Jorge has decided to leave the situation ambiguous - which, i have seen, does not sit well with current fandom culture. NEW fans of Calypso seem to be very adamant about NOT interpreting Calypso as a rapist, in levels that range for they’re just not comfy with it so decided not to head canon her as such, to other very concerningly speaking about rape survivors in such a way to justify liking a villain when you dont HAVE to justify liking a villain at any point at all ever.

Let’s break it down.

Those who just don’t like the idea of Calypso being a rapist in the MUSICAL are valid. It’s very easy to block and avoid those who have chosen to explore this aspect of her in the musical because they can and are allowed to. I am very pro-finding a space in fandom where you can talk about Calypso without HAVING to mention she might have raped someone. She’s still a villain for having kept Odysseus captive for seven years, but it’s not important. You are more than allowed to love villains, and without the rape aspect, Calypso’s villainy boils down to her physiological and emotionally torturing Odysseus while physically kidnapping him. That’s still ALOT of bad stuff to unpack, if you so want to. You could also not want to! It doesn’t hurt anyone, and anyone who says it does is not being intellectually honest.

The PROBLEM that I’m seeing, is that many of her newer fans…DONT want Calypso to be seen as a villain. At all. Which…is not how fandom works, I’m sorry to say.

While some EPIC fans have interpreted Calypso of being manipulative / selfish even in their most sympathetic analysis of the story (and the current song), others are treating these interpretation as wholly incorrect and somehow a form of harassment. The main caveat to this reaction appears to be, as TikTok puts it, “That Calypso DOESN’T SA Odysseus on the musical”

As we have pointed out, Calypso canonically rapes Odysseus in the poem, while it’s ambiguous in the musical. As we have ALSO pointed out, the ambiguity of the musical allow ALL INTERPRETATIONS to be correct. Something about the RAPE aspect of Calypso’s characterization in this musical, however, is the primary reason this discourse has happened.

Now, as i have said earlier. You are in your RIGHT to not head canon Calypso has a rapist in the musical. In the same vein others also have a RIGHT to head canon Calypso AS a rapist in the musical. But from what I’ve seen, it’s when others interpret Calypso as a rapist that newer Calypso fans leave comments about they’re not “interpreting the story correctly” and not “Judging calypso based on Jorge’s vision” and at first i found it funny…now it’s a bit concerning.

There are two instances that come to mind. One tiktoker made a video where she was in tears saying that it made HER SAD that people were “judging Calypso wholly based on outside sources material” which is disingenuous. As i have said before, even without the RAPE aspect of Calypso, which i will go further into what her newer fans consider “rape”, she is still an antagonist within the musical - she is a villain who keeps Odysseus against his will. To claim that they are calling her a villain for that reason alone is a blatant and useless addition to the discourse. I did not care for it at all. It would have been MUCH MORE constructive for this tiktoker to say that even though Calypso is a villain, the sexual assault is up to individual interpretation, and as all interpretations are valid, it’s better to find people who agree with your head canons rather than start fights with people who don’t share yours. This tiktoker very poorly worded the discourse as a one-sided thing where one side is wrong, and that is simply not true.

ANOTHER tiktoker, who wisely turned off comments because such discussions are impossible on the app, worryingly claimed that a line in Not Sorry for Loving You was absolute PROOF that Calypso did not “rape” Odysseus so it was wrong to interpret her as such, because, and this is a loose quotation “i don’t think Jorge would make Odysseus say something like that HAD Calypso done that to him” which unfortunately leaves fandom discourse into REAL WORLD victim discourse. Holy shit. The line she is referring to is when Odysseus calms Calypso down when she is in the middle of explaining her actions by saying “Calypso i love you, but not the way you want me to” to this tiktoker, it seems illogical for a rape victim to every say these kinds of things to their rapist…which is….NOT it. At all. Fiction, as beautiful as it is, is meant for you to QUESTION “huh…how would this impossible fictional scenario work? What makes this compelling?” It is NOT meant for you to attribute your REAL WORLD assumptions onto a FICTIONAL SCENARIO in order to justify you liking a villain character when you dont HAVE to justify it. You can like Calypso! It’s only weird when you make real-world comparisons like this because a rape victim can and HAS said as much and even more to their rapists in known history. *bonks you* dont do what this person did! Fiction allows you to explore situation that would be traumatizing outside of it in as safe and consensual way! You CANNOT and should NOT ascribe your personal biases on sensitive topics for FICTIONAL characters. That’s not how this works. “real victim wouldn’t x, so fictional wouldn’t y” is a ludicrous statement! You can’t back it up with facts! “Fictional victim does x, so i wonder if there ever would be a situation where a real victim would do y, and would like educate myself on the topic” IS what fiction was made for! OPENing your mind, not closing it for stupid reasons.

But it got me thinking. BECAUSE these fans anchor their arguments on the rape of Odysseus, even when they themselves DONT consider it, what exactly do they consider rape, and why is that ONE act Calypso may or may not do the ONLY reason to call her a villain when she is one, regardless.

Well, I’ve seen a lot of back and forth. Some anti-calypso’s are okay with the idea that Calypso is more of a “kissy-face” monster, a silly villain who, having no concept of what actual love is and what your supposed to do with someone you love, thinks hugging and kissing is the only thing on the table. It still makes this version of Calypso something of a sex pest and is still in line with sexual assault as we see Odysseus is miserable. The gravity of the situation is based entirely on funny fanfics to Odysseus canonically trying to kill himself because of Calypso’s affection. This interpretation (shockingly enough) is also hated by some new Calypso fans.

Because from what i have gathered. “SA” as used in TikTok, had been boiled down to a literal forced insertion of Odysseus’s dick in Calypso’s vagina. Not the literal words “sexual assault” which is an umbrella term for multiple things. But in this discourse “SA” has JUST been used for the ACT of rape itself. That is what new Calypso fans think is criminal. That is what they entirely base her villainy on. Because we will NEVER get confirmation on whether this happened, it’s impossible to engage with some of the newer fans, who dislike attributing Calypso with the villain title because of this one thing and this one thing alone. Any other line, from Calypso saying “and I’m sorry if i pushed you, or if i came on too strong” in her next song, or even her saying “in bed we will climb” is, for some reason, not grounds for others to be allowed to interpret her as, at the very least, assaulting Odysseus physically and sexually in a way without having to have actually raped him. It boggles my mind. Truly. But every argument i have seen has boiled down to the newer fans saying “welllllll, we dont know the context, and Odysseus said —“ when i have already explained that none of that matters. All interpretations are valid. You CANNOT say with certainty that she did or didn’t rape Odysseus. That’s the POINT. You can’t PROVE either, stop TRYING to, it’s YOUR choice and your interpretation can be backed by lyrics/official animatics, but it is hardly an absolute.

It has become a GROWING problem that in videos where Calypso is portrayed negatively, there are at least a dozen newer calypso fans who have to bring up how she is sympathetic, and therefore, not a villain. Which is not true. She is the MOST compelling villain in the epic musical, thus far.

These “fans” say that she absolutely didn’t rape Odysseus which is theory, not fact. And not a theory that can become fact. In the same way that saying she absolutely did rape is can not become fact. They appear to believe everything outside of this hypothetical act, nothing else she does is deserving of her title as a villain, and start arguments in non discourse posts about all the ways she’s sympathetic when it goes hand in hand with what makes her a compelling villain antagonist.

There’s also a newer cope saying that it’s all Zeus’s fault anyway, which has NO bearings on the conversation as, again, despite Zeus being a dick and allowing Odysseus live while not necessarily enabling him returning to Ithaca, it’s still up to Calypso on how she acts towards HER captive. And she straight up chooses violence lmao. Athena asks for “Devine intervention” to an impossible situation, regardless of if it was Zeus’s actions that led to it, it’s also up to him to “untie apprehensions” because Calypso, being a goddess, has complete control over whether Odysseus can leave and SHE won’t. She has to be ORDERD to. By a HIGHER power. Zeus.

Such argumentations as “well if YOU were in Calypso’s situation, wouldn’t you also do the same” are useless fallacies to get into, because you are NOT a goddess who owns an island and is in possession of a man who does not love you. Even if you were, guess what, it still makes you the antagonist. A villain. A knowing one or not.

In fact, since I LIKE interpretations that Calypso isn’t psychologically torturing Odysseus ON PURPOSE, i go as far as to say that her being a genuine goddess who wants love is in fact…..so much more painful, narratively. Because that means she is INCAPABLE of ever being a good person. Her loneliness and fear of being unloved makes her utterly blind to Odysseus’s misery. She HEARS him saying constantly that he misses his family, that all he hears are screams, and that SHE doesn’t know him, but she in turn CANNOT get passed this because she is, at her core, unable to, and thus accidentally triggers him constantly, is delusional about her island being paradise, AND convinces herself that her love is real (when it is not) and that Oddy will love her back if she keeps trying.

THAT is what you call a compelling villain!

As in all Calypso stories. There is NEVER a moment of clarity where Calypso realizes “if i actually love this person, i should let him go” in the musical HERMES is tasked in telling her to let him go. And she, as in all her other stories, goes on a tirade to explain/justify her actions, however you wish to see her being manipulative or honest. Regardless of how you choose to SEE calypso, at the end of the day, she has NO RIGHT to be upset at Odysseus because he was her captive. And REGARDLESS of whether Odysseus’s words are interpreted as him forgiving her, or just placating her, at the end of the day, he is her victim and she ends her next song upset that he is willingly leaving her once he got the chance. With absolutely no hope of him returning her feelings. It’s not his job to make her feel better, she IS an antagonist, and you are allowed to love her no matter how that might upset others. It is ONLY a problem when you take it to such extremes that you are in other peoples comments acting as if Calypso is a real person who needs defending. You are more than in your right to block people who come into YOUR videos accusing you of somehow being a bad person because you like a bad person. That’s not how fiction works.

Once again. My analysis of the Calypso debacle is that for some, calling Calypso a villain upsets them. Because they like her, and they are uncomfortable with the idea of liking a villain. This is a personal grievance that shouldn’t boil into fandom. Know your truth, have fun. You CAN make silly calypso videos. Many have. Her song is a bop, the meaning of the song is hilariously dark compared to the composition. Jorge did his job VERY well. Too well, that the idea of liking Calypso feels either / or when it’s not. TRUST that i would not be on the side of anyone who says “if you like calypso, youre evil”, but I HAVE seen a pattern that because Calypso is likable, than several people have made it their confused mission to tell everyone who is “mean to her” that “if you DISLIKE calypso, YOU are evil”. That’s bizarre to me. Calypso does enough evil actions in the musical to warrant that title regardless of the reasons for her actions, whether she is being purposely malicious or unconsciously so due to her lack of socialization. Being weird about real life SA survivors for a fictional character is never acceptable. For or against Calypso, whether she is a rapist or not, it is up to YOU to find like minded people who share your interpretation, not to argue with people who disagree with you in their own space. She isn’t real. Get over it.

ANYONE WHO HARASSES WAGNUI, COSPLAYERS, OR GOES INTO POSITIVE CALYPSO INTERPRETATION SPACES TO BE PURPOSELY MEAN* ARE WRONG. Otherwise. Leave them alone, they are as valid as you are. “Defending” a character is a waste of time when you could be creating for them. Calypso is a compelling villian antagonist regardless of how uwu or vile you choose to make her. Thus is the beauty of fiction.

(*purposely mean, would, logically, be someone calling you an idiot or a rape apologist for headcanoning her in a positive way. The ideal interaction with a negative calypso interpreter would be “i dont see her this way, but i understand/like your headcanon”)

WHICH BRINGS US TO Antinous:

Hilariously enough. Antinous has the complete INVERSE problem as Calypso, which was also detailed in her section for fairness sake at multiple points, and this problem is much easier to understand. Antinous is a villian antagonist in the musical Epic, and in his debut in the wisdom saga, he is shown (like calypso) to be in direct opposition to Telemachus and Penelope’s goal.

He alludes to sexual assault much more clearly than calypso. He calls Penelope a tramp to her son’s face AND suggests he let them into her room “so [they] can have fun with her” which is in the same vein as calypso saying “soon in bed we will climb” to Odysseus later on that “you (Odysseus) are mine all mine” in her own song. Like calypso, it is told to us that Antinous has been having this kind of vibe for FIVE YEARS* (a fan pointed this out to me! read here🙏🏼) as opposed to calypso’s seven years. Everyone is, usually, in agreement that Antinous is a villain in the wisdom saga and in the overall Epic musical.

Antinous’s VA is ON TikTok, and has spoken about how happy he is that fans consider him a talented person who did a spectacular rendition of such a villainous character. AND YET.

Inversely from what we saw in the Calypso section, where some of her fans are against the notion of her being portrayed as the antagonist she is, for Antinous we have MANY fans claiming that others are not ALLOWED to portray him as anything BUT an antagonist. Unlike with Calypso, where people circularly argue that her allusions to sexual assault are “too ambigous” and lead to much senseless debate on whether you’re “allowed” to like her or call her a villian, with ANTINOUS, there is this claim that he ABSOLUTELY is alluded to sexual assault and therefore, cannot be liked or treated as anything other than a villain.

As i have discussed AT LENGTH in Calypso’s section, this argumentation is pure fallacy.

There have been NUMEROUS thirst videos that have rightfully said that DESPITE the actions of the character, they still think Antinous is hot and likable (the Gaston affect, if you will). Even WITHOUT the disclaimer, it is OF COURSE understood that Antinous fans are NOT rape apologists. That is a ridiculous assumption that serves only to kill any interpretation that someone else can rightfully have.

It’s utterly devoid of nuance or actual knowledge of how to play within fandom and interact w characters.

There have been SEVERAL posts calling Antinous fans delusional for liking him and “reminding” the fandom that he is a bad guy. This serves no purpose and is utterly useless to the discourse. Antinous being a bad guy is not debated. This is factual. It doesn’t (or shouldn’t, because we cannot speak in absolutes) hurt anyone’s feelings to see an Antinous videos depicting him as the villain he is. Like with Calypso it is ONLY acceptable to call someone out if they are harassing Ayron Alexander, Antinous’s VA (which has NOT happened as i am writing this out) OR if an anti-Antinous comes into SOMEONE ELSE’s post saying anything like “if you like Antinous then you condone his actions” because as what we sane people know, that is just a silly fallacy, OR if they start shit in a cosplayers/fanfic writer/fanartists comment section.

Otherwise. Who cares that someone is saying Antinous is a villain? Block the no fun police and enjoy analysis from others who choose to see him purely as what he is, if you want. If you dont, block them to, it’s your space. You have a RIGHT to headcanon Antinous however you want, even make up AUs for him where he’s nice or lives and gets a happy ending, SO LONG AS you’re not in other people’s posts going actually Antie is my uwu child and he did nothing wrong. Cuz then youre just being dumb. And annoying. Fandom is already impatient with genuine disagreement, being a smart ass gets your head dunked in a toilet. I used to think this was common sense.

(And in case you didn’t read the Calypso section, or didn’t see enough of it there, this IS the appropriate response to people who address newer fans of her as rape apologists too, its in her section, i just also thought it was important to touch on the stranger phenomena of her other fans refusing to call her a villain because it makes them personally uncomfortable - it’s very interesting as Calypso is a female antagonist while Antinous being a male antagonist is being treated very differently for the same subject. In any case, it’s a disservice to either character and Jorge’s narrative to get upset about the very real fact that BOTH of these characters are villain antagonists.)

The very CURRENT discourse surrounding Antinous is that he was recently shipped with Telemachus.

The animator for Apollo’s section of God Games was harassed to such a point that she had to make a public apology regarding her ALTERNATE UNIVERSE scenario. And i, personally, think that’s bullshit.

There have been accusations that she was being insensitive to sexual assault survivors, and that she made a dark joke, all of which she addressed in her apology IN ADDITION to her explaining that she is ALSO a survivor of child sexual assault. She took down her work. DESPITE all of this, there are still others who continue to harass her, and claim that they dont want “a rape creator” in THEIR fandom. To those people: you don’t speak for any of us. In the same way you can claim not to believe that the animator is a survivor, i have no reason to consider your concerns in any way shape or form as being in service of victims. It is absolutely not your call, when blocking and scrolling on will ALWAYS be an option for YOU.

Even in the event someone writes Antonio’s fan fiction keeping his canon personality and characterization in a non-canon divergent way it is not grounds to harass people.

In addition to this animator, there have been SEVERAL Antinous shippers who have expressed disappointment that she was essentially harassed into a corner, as they also liked the ship and the AU she created. These people are NOT “weird” they are allowed to express themselves creatively, and if you disagree, dont even bother with leaving any sort of response — i wont read it, my time is important. Stay in your echo chamber. Even if it wasn’t an AU, and someone wants to write for Antinous as he is in the narrative, they are more than allowed to do so. Dark fiction isn’t going to traumatize you or give you cooties. Grow up.

I am MUCH more willing to ride with Antinous shippers than i ever will be with fans who attempt to control how a character is interpreted by others. Because to ship Antinous with anyone, AU or otherwise, you have to have an UNDERSTANDING of why this would be a compelling thing to write/make fanart for. He is an evil character, and it would be FASCINATING to see him in fictional scenarios that (like in the calypso section) lead us to as WHY this would be an appealing and interesting take on someone. It’s OKAY to do it in fiction. He isn’t REAL. It’s not hurting EVERYONE. And more so than with calypso, it IS understood that Antinous HAS victims in Penelope and Telemachus There’s no senseless debate on what he is, a villain, no one is arguing he is a uwu babygirl so please sympathize w him, it’s inherently understood even among his FANS.

This is why find Antonio’s and Calypso’s discourses so polarizing. Because no one is getting offended or arguing that Antinous only acts villainously because of some tragic backstory or sympathetic reason. It would be absurd to.

That’s the appeal of a lovable villain. Because like Calypso, Antinous IS lovable, but in such a different way that you have fans treating both characters as if they’re polar opposite when at the very LEAST, there’s on the same bracket, just different ends of them. Telemachus/Penelope and Odysseus’s plights are being MIRRORED in parallel.

THAT is what floors me about these two discourses. That they are functionally THE SAME yet are being treating as if they aren’t. I’m positive that there is an Antinous fan who detests Calypso in the same way there is a Calypso fan who detests Antinous. These are called biases. Once you KNOW your own bias, it is up to YOU to act right according to them.

You are responsible for your OWN fyp.

The Epic fandom had yet to experience such backwards discourse as this, and I wouldn’t expect Jorge or any of the VAs to dignify such trivial discourse with a response. If you’re the type to bring it up to them, you’re being awful. The popular fandom Epic tiktokers are already way too involved as it is. And even they are getting things wrong.

It almost feels remiss to say that in the NARRATIVE of the musical, both Calypso and Antinous are villian antagonists, while outside of the narrative they become dolls you can play with however you like, so long as we are not in each others comments being obtuse. I don’t expect any of my essay to even make it to a larger part of the fandom. But i HAD to get my ideas written down, because if you don’t see someone else connecting the dots you have, you have to present them yourself. Very “can’t we all just get along?” But hopefully, not as insufferable nor one-sides as others might have been. I tried to bring up ideas/points that i have not seen discussed about these two villains and why they seem to connect and go hand in hand.

Why is Calypso, as a female antagonist, given more grace than Antinous, a male antagonist, who is very firmly given none at all. It very well could be just how they were presented, and if so, ask yourself WHY these villains were presented so differently. What purpose do they serve? What are they trying to accomplish? These are questions more suited for actual fandom collaboration that is being drowned out by circular arguements. It feels like homework, instead of knee-jerk reacting to interpretations unlike your own.

To ME, these two characters are two sides of the same coin. (though I DO think it’s funny that the NEUTRAL phrase to refer to either character is “I hate them BUT” because in reasonable fandoms, this is understood inherently….but in this fandom such decorum seems to be lost? For some reason?? Wisdom saga has brought out a lack of wisdom, I fear.) This is the kind of purity culture that suggest you can’t LIKE a character of their a villain, so you go out of your way to argue they aren’t, or that no one else should like them: that’s bonkers. You might disagree and it might even upset you, but that’s a you problem to have.

Having said that, and if you are POSITIVE that you want to engage in conversation with me, you are welcome to do so.

[nobodysavemysoulitsperfectlyfine]

Do you have an unpopular opinion (PJO) that you might be hated for?

I don't think I have many unpopular opinions, but I will say now that Jiper and Frazel (only when not done right) make me VERY uncomfortable to ship, and that's not even DARING to mention the horrors that is Caleo. Point being that Rick doesn't know how to write relationships, and the only ones that seem vaguely successful are because of the fans putting the pieces together, and because he so obviously based Percabeth off of himself and his wife. Pairing EVERY character off, declaring they're ace and automatically can't date, or just killing them all together honestly soured the experience a bit for me. I think so much more development would've been possible if so much of it wasn't dedicated to stupid ship that hardly anyone likes anyways.

For Jiper, the reasons are relatively obvious. If the two had more time to work things out after their initial breakup, I reluctantly guess it could be possible, but the point is that most of everything they had was based off lies and illusions of what they WOULD have wanted out of a whole sort of weird junk. Sometimes it even felt like Piper saw things in Jason that weren't really there (and the other way around too), meaning that so much of it was based off speculation and hopes for a comfort that it would've never lasted. I just can't get over that barrier when I see it. This isn't even mentioning Piper's journey with sexuality, which, her actively choosing to not have a label yet may have been one of the smartest (or just cowardly) things Rick has ever done. All in all, the possibilities are neat to think about, but no. 4/10

Frazel — only hate it when they're so SEVERELY mischaracterized or flanderized to a point. Lots you think the racism in Jiper fans is bad? Hoo boy. 9.5/10

Caleo — HATE. LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT HATE. -100000/10 DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THE

Percabeth — Relatively on thin ice. Heavy misunderstandings here too. I didn't always like reading about it for whatever reason. Objectively fine but.. I'm keeping my eye out. 7/10

[hibipoyo]

The Controversy of Antinous and Calypso: a Survivor’s Perspective

MAJOR trigger warning for uncensored discussion of sexual assault, rape, and sexual abuse, manipulation, and gaslighting. Read on ONLY if you’re in the right headspace.

Disclaimer I: This is about Epic and its fandom, not the Odyssey.

Disclaimer II: I am not the voice of all sexual abuse survivors. This is my opinion and mine alone.

Calypso and Antinous are, from my experience, the two most controversial figures in Epic, and it’s not hard to see why. Sexual assault and abuse are a challenging topic for most people, and it’s hard to portray it properly in media. Some people believe it shouldn’t exist in any fiction. However, I have very strong feelings to the contrary—SA is an extremely important topic to discuss, for the protection and education of all people.

Let’s start with Calypso. Her songs are less explicit with it, but word of god and word of Homer generally agree that she was sexually abusive towards Odysseus. Despite this, she’s shown in a light that some people consider to be too soft, too sympathetic, but I believe this light to be entirely artificial. She may be complex and have her own struggles, but throughout the entirety of Love in Paradise, it is made increasingly clear that Calypso is in complete control and awareness of her actions. She plays with Odysseus like a puppet, and her presence is oppressive, even stifling. There’s an obvious power imbalance between the two.

Not Sorry for Loving You may be the more controversial of the two songs, as some people might see it as making light of her actions, but remember: this is from Calypso’s perspective. She is responding to his departure by attempting to paint herself as sympathetic. I’ve been a victim of this treatment multiple times—“I’m sorry you felt hurt by my actions, but you’re actually hurting me, I need you. Stay.” It’s a real abuse tactic. This song is portraying real abuse. Calypso may genuinely think she loves him, but it is still abuse, and she knows what she is doing. Odysseus, in saying “I love you, but not in the way you want me to,” is not expressing genuine love. He is attempting to placate her so she’ll leave him alone and he can get the hell out of there. I’ve done the exact same thing so I wouldn’t get hurt.

Now, Antinous. Oh, god, where do I start. The other antagonists are horrible, but he is disgusting. Now, where he’s controversial is that many consider his plan to rape Penelope to be gratuitous and unnecessary, and some people say he’s not given enough motive. Some people say that it feels like a shock move, and that’s a valid perspective. However, I’ll raise you: actual rape is NEVER for a good reason. It is never necessary, and it is ALWAYS gratuitous. The only motive is to exert power, one way or another.

This doesn’t come out of nowhere—even in Legendary, he has this plan stewing in his head. He was disgusting and creepy from the start. It didn’t come out of nowhere. He’s always been entitled. He has a long-standing fantasy of power, and he knows he can use Penelope to get to it. That’s what he does. He uses people. He’s not tragic like the sirens and Scylla, or jaded but kind like Circe, or trying to protect his own like Polyphemus. He’s just evil. And arguably, that is very realistic—some people don’t have a sad backstory. They just suck.

I hope this was comprehensible. I’m lowkey exhausted lol

[phyllisamaryllis]

Misogyny against PJO Calypso

I have to say that PJO as a fanbase can be surprisingly biased against Calypso and sometimes their misogyny shows. You have a right to dislike Calypso and how she was written and retconned, but some of the posts I've seen about her are just plain misogynistic.

Calypso doesn't owe her life to Leo just because he rescued her from her island. She doesn't have to cater to him and his desires. She's entitled to live her own life on her own terms.

If she wants to stay back at her school instead of spending time with Leo, if she wants to travel the world with or without him, if she wants to make new friends and hang out with them, she is entitled to all of that and she's not morally bad for it.

Not to disappoint Caleo shippers or anything, but I honestly think that the best arc for Caleo would be for them to break up. Calypso wants to travel the world and make new friends; Leo wants to stay at the Waystation, teach kids and help them. The natural solution? A breakup. It doesn't even have to be messy and sad either-just a simple, amicable breakup, an acknowledgment that they like each other as friends, but that they can't stay together because they just don't work out.

I also think that this breakup arc would be healthy for young children and teenagers who read this because it shows them that not all breakups have to be messy and sad. That you can breakup with someone politely and remain on good terms with them, which makes the readers less apprehensive about breakups.

Just my thoughts, feel free to add on.

[penelope-from-ithica]

Me trying to explain the issue of fiction vs reality, how it doesn’t inherently affect irl affairs but it CAN—

—when someone asks me if I’m a proshipper and technically I guess I am??? (On the notion that I truly believe you shouldn’t harass real people on the basis of fiction) but ALSO I don’t really vibe with the proshipper label because as a community, I don’t trust them (because of the pro-para stuff) -mod note

Sharpwolf stuff got me thinking

So does the discourse around calypso

[michealisnotcanadian]

I don't get all the Calypso discourse, genuinely.

Like, I love Calypso as a character, but it's the same way I love Antinous as a character. They're some of my favorite yet I'm not excusing their actions.

Calypso raped him, and even if that's not explicitly stated in the musical, she still was possessive and predatory towards Odysseus. Like, what part of "Love in Paradise" is supposed to make you feel good towards her?

I'm not saying that liking Calypso is bad. It's great. But no one should be excusing her blatant actions. Also, I'm not saying you should irrationally hate her as well. Look her up and make your own interpretations. Just keep in mind what she did and don't obliviously defend her. Thank you!

[geeky-zombie]

This might be a hot take and maybe this is just personal bias, but honestly Rick falls short when it comes to writing romantic relationships.

Like 90% of the canonical pairings feel off to me, whether that's percy x Annabeth, Jason x piper, Nico x will, frank x hazel, etc. None of them really interest me or even feel well written, and the fandom makes up for it by adding additional depth (and sometimes untrue feelings) to the relationship

Not to mention they all are written too tropey for me. It's like he just looked at his characters in the pairing, chose something surface level that they presented, and chose whatever trope fitted the best and RAN with it

[specialagentartemis]

"Odysseus never once cheated on his wife!" wrong "Odysseus spent 10 years slutting it up around the Mediterranean sleeping around with every women he met" also wrong. can we move on now

[dkmbookworm]

Okay I seriously need y’all to quit this shit of leaving comments like:

“They could never make me like ____”

“I hate ____ but your art is cool”

“When I catch you ____”

Unless the creator has demonstrated they’re okay with these kind of comments or tags. Don’t do it. They might just like the character and want to post about them. And now you’ve clogged their notes with your salty bs.

If you want to talk about hating them, do it on your own fucking post

[ingravinoveritas]

OFMD/GO crossover where Aziraphale and Crowley are invited to celebrate Calypso's Birthday and Aziraphale teaches Stede and the crew of the Revenge how to gavotte. Ed and Crowley watch while drinking wine.

Ed: "That one yours?"

Crowley: "Yeah. What--no, he's not actually mine. So to speak. He's an angel."

Ed: "Angel? Oh, mate, you've really got it bad, don't you?"

Crowley: "Do not."

Ed: "Do, too."

Crowley: "Not like I ever fantasized about him as a mermaid. Man. Mer-being."

Ed: "Fuck off."

(Crowley smirks while Ed looks annoyed as they both take another drink at the same time. Ed and Crowley's gazes drift back to Stede and Aziraphale respectively as they continue to watch them dance.

Fin.)

[anadakkar]

One thing I have understood through life is that you learn a lot about yourself through relationships that you previously werent aware of and also failed relationships are a part of your life and totally okay if you have a couple of them in your past. Also you dont need to become the perfect version of yourself to fall in love with someone or allow yourself to be loved by someone. Its totally possible that the person isnt "the one" for you. But that doesnt mean you didnt love them or they didnt love you or your relationship didnt work out because you werent "healed"

I see a lot of people saying that rick shouldnt have given leo a girlfriend and he should have gotten over his trauma first or let him find friends and family first who love and accept him. But the thing is that childhood traumas arent that easy to heal from and sometimes people dont heal from them even after a lifetime. Your past sticks with you. Having past traumas is not the reason you should be stopping yourself from experiencing something really normal like feeling an attraction towards someone, having affection and care for them in your heart and wanting to be really really close to them or even sacrificing for them because love is sacrifice as a friend of mine likes to say.

I wonder why, we almost never hear this about percy, annabeth, magnus, sam, carter, zia, or any other character who seems to have perfect/healthy relationships in the books.

Did those characters not have trauma? Why does nobody ever say "annabeth should have moved on from luke first before kissing percy" when everyone knows she had feeling for him since ages? Thats something more normal to say in my opinion...

Healing from trauma is not easy and nobody should be forbidden from experiencing love just because they have some harmful coping mechanisms. You can heal while being in a relationship too. And if the relationship doesnt work out. Its totally okay too. Not every relationship is "the one" for you and not every relationship is meant to work out. But every relationship brings joy and a lot of love and new beautiful experiences in your life. And romantic relationships arent something you "need" to avoid. You dont need to experience love from friends and family first before getting into a romantic relationship with someone. You can allow you lover to be your first family or first friend too. And i am sure they will cherish it. Leo is a kid who fell in love with a person and he is not wrong for it. Calypso fell in love and carried hope in her heart all those years that burned the brightest because of leo. And Rick.. he has experienced life more than any of us. I dont think he was wrong to put those two together. It makes the books more realistic in my opinion.

[bisonl]

“Penelope: *Looks at Ody*

Ody: *Withers into smol boi* 😳”

@vvren-garden came up with this, go follow her! Spam her!

[timekeepers-memoir]

imo i dislike calypso any of my moots can agree to disagree