#i just think it would look nice. but i think that shows a fundamental lack of discernment by me

[unopenablebox]

are you going to judge me if i cast off this shawl and immediately start another one by the same designer

[longing-for-rain]

Out of curiosity, what makes you feel drawn to Zutara as a lesbian. Is it still relatable to you?

It does feel relatable to me. Obviously it’s a heterosexual relationship, but given the lack of good and complete representation of lesbian relationships in the media, I still gravitate towards certain aspects of romances like this.

There are many reasons why, but before I get into it, I want to preface this by saying that the point of this is not to say that Zutara is “lesbian coded” or anything like that so please don’t construe it that way. It’s a heterosexual relationship, period. All I’m saying here is what I, personally, enjoy about it as a lesbian.

The biggest reason I like it is because it represents female desire to me. I know the BoyMom and Pick-Me brigade hates that I’ve described Zutara that way in the past—but it’s true and I stand by it. That is the reason why Zutara became so popular and why its fanon narrative is almost entirely driven by female fans. It directly reflects their desire in a romance and what Katara’s canon one was lacking.

I honestly didn’t have strong feelings about Zutara until I saw the backlash it received. The narrative and the fans both treat Katara as if getting with anyone besides Aang makes her selfish, or that she’s neglecting some kind of duty by doing so. Katara’s voice and desire is fundamentally unimportant to the writers, because they always focused on Aang’s feelings over hers, and even though fans try to pretend otherwise, the dominant narrative surrounding this relationship has always been about Aang. How he needs airbending children, how his heart would be broken if she left, how he needs her to rebuild, etc.

And from Katara’s side, even though she never shows that she shares Aang’s level of interest, fans insist on reading in signs that aren’t really there. They also focus on logical reasons why they’d work. Aang is nice, he’s fun, he’s a prodigy like Katara, both have suffered in the war, etc. At first glance, it seems like a good match…but we never actually see the writing demonstrate how they actually connect over any of these things.

Good in theory, but bland and passionless in reality.

That narrative resonated with me in a bad way, because it’s exactly how I’ve felt as a lesbian. It reflects the pressures I’ve felt to put aside my desire for love to date a man instead. I’ve been told to my face that it’s selfish for me to “choose” another woman—a person I actually desire—over a man.

“What about children?”

“This is going to make your life so much more difficult!”

“Think of your family!”

“Jakey is such a nice guy, can’t you just give him a chance?”

“You have so many interests in common with Jakey and he has a good job! Why won’t you go out with him? It makes so much sense!”

“You’re so shallow, being fixated on looks. What if your perfect match comes along, but he’s male? Would you really say no?”

“You only want that because you’re a pervert. You need to stop being so obsessed with sex and think about the person instead.”

It’s eerily familiar, that’s all I’m saying. A lot of these ideas are used to attack Zutara and its fans nearly verbatim.

Katara isn’t a lesbian, but like a lesbian, Katara in the context of Zutara commits the crime of marrying for love and desire over duty. Some people see that as an evil act of selfishness, but to me, it’s just love.

We can’t control who we love, and I like to see the narrative of a female character breaking free from the social expectations placed on her to pursue it. No; Zuko isn’t the “safe” option, their relationship would be heavily criticized, and it could even endanger them. But that relationship is one they both feel passion for, and together, they would draw power from one another and use it for good. Their love and connection is powerful, and they would have fought hard for it. Because love is worth fighting for.

That’s deeply admirable to me, and an empowering narrative when I think about how I’m inevitably going to have to fight hard for any love of mine. But it’s worth it to me—it’s always worth it.

[therainscene]

Since The First Shadow has folks talking about Henry’s queerness (or lack thereof), I wanted to share my take on it as someone who tends to interpret him as gay.

I’m not going to be talking about his relationship with Patty, though -- I can’t afford to see the play and don’t want to rely on secondary sources for this, so I simply can’t comment on it. (I’m sure they’re lovely together, though.)

To me, Henry’s queer-coding isn’t a question of whether he’s literally gay -- it’s a question of what role his villainy plays in the story.

The biggest non-Patty-related criticism against queer interpretations of Henry is that it would carry an uncomfortably homophobic implication: that queers are dangerous predators.

This was a common belief in the 80s, and the show references it by having Troy chuckle at the idea of Will getting "killed by some other queer" -- a prediction that comes symbolically and unpleasantly true when Joyce finds him with one of Vecna’s vines literally shoved down his throat.

It's tempting to try and solve this problem by interpreting Henry as straight -- the homophobic implications of his child-assaulting villainy will disappear if he's not queer, right?

Well... in my opinion, no.

A key aspect of Henry's character is that he's different. Whether you interpret that difference as queerness, neurodivergence, or simply that he has powers -- the fact remains that he is fundamentally the sort of person whom society looks down upon with fear and suspicion.

If he’s not a predatory queer, then he's a remorseless psychopath. If he's not a remorseless psychopath, then he's a vessel for an evil alien. There's no way to escape the implication that he’s dangerous because he’s different.

Eddie’s character resonates with this principle too. Indeed, our introduction to him is a monologue in which he complains about being treated with suspicion just because he’s different.

Given their similarities in this regard, I think it’s interesting that the show endears us to Eddie in the same breath it makes us fear Vecna. It almost feels like a test--

We know you’ll sympathize with a weirdo who sells drugs to troubled minors when you get to see things from his perspective, but can you sympathize with a weirdo who hurts troubled minors when you don’t get to see things from his perspective? Will you jump to unfair conclusions about Henry in the same way the town jumps to unfair conclusions about Eddie?

My point here isn’t that Henry did nothing wrong or that his villainy is justified -- I’m pretty sure he did commit the murders Eddie was scapegoated for and I’m pretty sure that’s a bad thing -- but he’s always held at arm’s length from the audience. The show plays the role of Jason, encouraging us to blindly hate him on gut instinct instead of giving him a fair trial.

It’s an easy test to fail, because it does seem like we get to see Henry’s perspective -- he has a whole villain speech, after all.

But the trouble is, this speech takes place within NINA. What we’re watching is footage that has been curated by his abuser and shown through the eyes of a traumatized girl who barely understands what happened -- secondary sources who are invested in viewing him as a threat.

Consider that Henry’s hairstyle mysteriously changes during the massacre. It’s one of those subtle costuming choices that isn’t meant to be consciously picked up on, but which registers at the back of our minds and leaves us feeling unsettled -- this Henry isn’t like the Henry we were looking at before.

The obvious way of interpreting this is that the mask has finally slipped -- the “nice” Henry was fake, and now we see him for who he “really” is. But I’m not inclined to interpret it that way, because of all the hairstyles they could have chosen... they just so happened to opt for one that resembles Brenner. (Pun intended.)

This isn’t Henry with his mask off -- this is Henry as Brenner wants him to be.

Fear-mongering over the existence of queer people has long been a useful tool for those in power -- in the 80s, fear of AIDS did the job nicely -- and so too has Brenner forged Henry into a tool to further his own goals, no regard given to the harm he causes in the process.

Like the “predatory queer”, Henry is defined on his oppressor’s terms, and like Eddie, it makes him a useful scapegoat. He only became what he did because of an unethical institution, and treating him as the problem is just as short-sighted as blaming gay men for the AIDS crisis.

That isn’t to say Vecna hasn’t become a genuine threat, though. Will makes a prediction as to how S5 is going to end--

--and while I’m not expecting things to end as violently as Will implies here -- that’s not Will’s thing -- I do believe that Vecna is going to be defeated by his hand. As tragic as Vecna’s origin was, he still made his own choices once he was free from Brenner, and he’s likely too far gone at this point to be capable of earning his happy ending.

But that’s what makes it so important that Will gets his happy ending.

Queer characters have been exclusively cast as villains or tragic sadbois for so long that I can completely sympathize with people’s hesitance to embrace Henry as a tragic queer villain.

But villains only exist within the context of the heroes who challenge them... and in a show about a queer-coded villain who personifies the anger and despair of being abused for what you are, a loving gay boy who breaks the cycle of abuse by learning that he has the right to be the hero of his own story is the perfect foil for him.

[tomgrcg]

we've learnt for a fact now that tom feels the full range of human emotions towards greg and that he can't let anyone in or he'll die. so how does he express his emotions? the only way he can let himself. he wants to be a specific kind of person, a roy, and how he is feeling and what he wants to do does not fit in with how these people behave. he doesn’t do it because it’s natural. he does it because he has to. he throws insults at it and tries to wrestle it to the ground but it feels weak because his heart isn’t in it.

neither greg or tom are like the roys at their core. they weren’t raised in it. there are moments of real happiness for the two of them when they’re alone and can just be themselves. there's something different in their relationship dynamic here than the relationships the siblings have. it doesn’t feel as bittersweet because they aren’t as fundamentally broken.

tom is more guarded, of course, he’s received some emotional damage from shiv so he always says or does something to keep greg just far enough away. he’s learnt vulnerability is dangerous. every time he tries to show shiv that he loves her she makes him feel like he’s done it wrong. this season he started behaving in a way that would get through to her but that didn’t feel good to him either, didn’t save him from being fired, nothing.

shiv needed the kind of love tom gave her the same way tom needs what greg gives him. but the difference is tom is more capable of accepting love from people he cares about and wouldn’t hurt greg any deeper than a weak insult, even if he could.

tom knows what it’s like to have to beg for someone who is supposed to care about you to do something for you, so when greg asked if he could possibly save him from going to jail he says load me up without a second thought. he cares about greg’s feelings and would sacrifice something of his own for them and it’s this empathy that tom has that the roy family is lacking.

it’s not hard for tom to think to do something for another person for no reason other than it would make that person feel good. no quid pro quo. but even when tom does do something good for greg he 'can’t stand the good feeling he’s engendered' because he feels like he shouldn’t be doing nice things for no reason.

the nero and sporus scene was tom telling greg he cares about him at all and “come with me, sporus?” was the marriage proposal. greg asks what’s in it for him because that’s how greg works and tom has to say “who has ever looked out for you” instead of “i want you with me”. tom cannot let him know the depth of how he feels so he lets greg think he's using him for something and only merely tolerates him, like everyone else does.

and then, because greg still doesn’t get it, or is choosing to ignore it, tom has to yell “not samson! i want you gregging for me!" he still can’t say the real reason why. the only time he’s shown his real emotions to greg is when he’s alone in a room and greg can’t see his face through the phone.

it's not a perfect relationship. it's not supposed to be. that's why it's so compelling. it’s please don't be better than me i can't stand it but i love you. it’s i’m using you to get somewhere in the world but i’ll still look after you even when i don’t need to anymore. (villainfvcker made a great post about this.)

i’m writing this after episode eight, and if they’re going all the way with greg’s transformation into a roy family member and he betrays tom in some way, it will be another case of a succession character destroying the only real connection they have for some kind of power, and regretting it later.

if anything at all, we know tom really does love greg, and that’s a satisfying enough tomgreg endgame for me, personally.

[actual-changeling]

Why are people looking at Aziraphale and seeing a completely different character from who he is? Why do they think he’s a leader? He never showed leadership skills. Why do they think it’s so unlikely that Aziraphale doesn’t listen a word of Crowley’s confession when Aziraphale hasn't listened to a single word Crowley has told him the entire season? Why do they feel the need to see Aziraphale as a hero who can never do wrong? He totally disregards Crowley’s feelings in the final 15 and I’m so mad about the fact that some people think that Crowley should apologize or that he was too slow to pick up some fucking clues that exist only in the minds of Aziraphale’s hardcore defenders.

Honestly, I think it's because some people have problems separating themselves from Aziraphale as a character simply because they see one or more of their own traits reflected in him.

By trying to make him out to be better than he is and defending him, they're trying to justify those traits to themselves (and others). Once you get down to it, there's a lot of people talking about how they would have done the same in Aziraphale's place—and they cannot admit that hey, maybe that choice is fucked up and hurts the people around you.

Maybe your refusal to work on yourself isn't "noble" and "angelic" but part of a bigger problem and based on a fundamental lack of self-reflection. Aziraphale puts his own comfort above everything else, so of course he appeals to people that do the same.

Then there's the whole religious aspect which has people on the barricades immediately because how dare you imply that an angel could ever do something that is not kind and good and selfless; like okay, go preach your fucked up christian ideology elsewhere, not in the bible satire fandom.

It IS frustrating, people go and call Crowley bad and evil and give him the worst intentions because he's a demon, say reason why they try to make everything about Aziraphale seem great and nice. By acknowledging the fact that

a) Aziraphale has been hurting Crowley for centuries

b) he fucked up

c) Crowley has nothing to apologize for,

they're forced to confront that hey, maybe I've also fucked up in the past. Aziraphale is in a bad place, he needs to change, and by refusing to understand that, people are really just saying that THEY don't want to work on themselves.

It's personal, plain and simple, and somehow that makes it okay to go harass people who don't blindly follow the Aziraphale Defense Squad or whatever shit they wanna call themselves. I have absolutely no sympathy left after everything that went down.

[kendrixtermina]

Giving Doctor Who a New Chance, Part 3: The Giggle

It's nice that they're bringing back some classic villain, but I really wish they had the Toymaker butcher some other language. The gag is just not funny at all when you actually speak German

Ok, that's an illustrative montage of a mightyfine chaos

IDK what I think of this - set it up in a way that it can be reset again.

oooh, Mel is back! As a 6th Doctor fan, I appreciate this. Did not expect that. She still got that perky way of talking.

Having seen the eps he was in, slipping over a bottle of Vodka is exactly like Sabalon Glitz would die, but hey, at least he lived to a ripe old age.

Donna just landed herself a new job. I guess there's that duality in human's fluctuating confidence levels again cause she glibly asks for double but looks ecstatic that it worked

so, Donna doesn't remember in detail, but she got a rough glimpse

the guy playing the Toymaker IS pulling off the creepy clown act pretty well tho

I really liked that scene between Donna & the Doctor in the infinite cabinet with the Doctor re-evaluating his life choices.

That's another thing that's been missing, that fucking Chibnall didn't get - that the point of him, at the end of the day, is that he's just some guy. Somewhat wiser & tougher than a human, maybe, but still fundamentally just dude with wits & confidence. A trickster, a flawed person trying to do the right thing that through trickery ended up with this fearsome reputation. I used to think of RTD not getting it as much as Moffat did cause he did like overly savior-archetype-like plots sometimes whereas moffat emphasized the 'just a madman with a box' angle, but RTD gets it in this scene where we see the Doctor cringing at his past self for things he couldn't have foreseen & now he doesn't know what to do in a world that doesn't follow predictable rules

Because that's what they don't tell you about getting smarter, wiser or even just older - the price you pay for knowing better today is cringing at the awareness you used to lack. thats very real. you end up thinking you should somehow have known or done better even if you couldnt have.

there's certainly some thematic rhyming with the 'narrowmindedness-plague' afflicting the earth

Donna's dad is actually right. Good for him to be wary of the Hot Hand fallacy and its ilk. Missed a chance for an epic nerd reference

I dunno what to think about the concept of 'shift to fantasy', i wouldnt have done that & really turned more to harder & concept fanfiction, but i suppose it keeps thinks fresh without being repetitive (they cant keep destroying and un-destroying gallifrey all the time...) & the show has always been the very softest of sci-fi anyway - at leasts its set up in a way that it can be reset again or let future writers pick whatever they want. though i suppose it depends on how its done like, if possible without wholly throwing out humanist values. You can absolutely be a trickster in a fantasy story or fight crazy things with logic; Infinity train did it to great effect. I mean, the classics had far wonkier stuff like actual Vampires & whatnot.

i appreciate Donna rhyming while defeating the puppet

"jingsaw out of your history" thing imply that the timeless child thing was an in-universe retcon of sorts? Oh please. I mean I could kinda sorta accept 13 is she literally wasn't really the same character.

between this & the last episode it's pretty close anyway to the "every single backstory is true because of timey wimey ball" thing from the expanded universe fixed, on-screen canon. That I could live with. It's potentially deeply interesting that by virtue of getting tangled up in all the timelines the Doctor has in some ways been to many possible futures & possible versions of reality.

Former companions werent affected by the giggle thing cause it was a retroactive change made by the toymaker upon getting free

It's kinda sad that we'll never get to see the battle between the Master and the Toymaker because that must really have been something. Like two Jokers or Phantoms of the Opera fighting.

this is like when Q showed up on the bridge of the enterprise. Only much deadlier. I appreciate that the scene never stops feeling actually menacing.

I like how Mel also comes in to hold his hand, too, she's for realsies. (I guess this is how she makes up for making him drink all that carrot juice)

The "Alons-y" is a niftly little contrast/ bookend with 10s exit

My headcanon is that bi-generation absolutely WAS a myth, but that this is an extension of the whole breach in the logic/edge of reality storyarc being set up here, or really just the Toymaker thinking it would be fun to double them infinitely

I like how the Doctor mocks the Toymaker's fake accent with 'the ball' thing

The advantage with the ball game is, of course, that Fifteen has already seen it. He's fabulous alright.

I appreciate how they climb on each other at some point

I don't envy Kate, watching this absurd thing... humanity already got somewhat good at taking Sci-Fi threats on their own, but this they don't have context for. Maybe UNIT is gonna need a vault of magical artifacts now. I suppose you can play with that for a few seasons. Like how a contrast of fantasy & sci-fi elements worked in Madoka.

I like how Donna is casually putting her arm around 15

I guess 15 has reached that point where rather than cringe at your younger self you're able to have compassion. That's a good arc, actually.

aaand of course there's the obligatory sequel hook for the Master's return, to the surprise of no one

I like how the years with the lost memory weren't completely lost but Donna still learned something from them that allows her to send this message now

Soo Fifteen is basically taking advantage of the cartoon logic still being in effect until the end of the episode to duplicate the TARDIS. I bet it only worked because he picked the silliest possible hammer.

I appreciate how 15 makes sure to get one last Donna hug.

I do like that it kinda came down to self-love, self-compassion & knowing when to take a restorative break & all that. That's an important message these days.

So, the Nobles just deadass adopted the Doctor & Mel. Makes all the sense.

I always thought of Mel & the Doctor's dynamic as sibling-like (as opposed to Peri & the Doctor having a 'tsundere couple' energy & Ace who of course had a teacher/student thing), so I feel vindicated.

Also I appreciate how an older woman who didn't have kids but spent her life traveling & adventuring & doing what she wanted, & then ended up feeling a bit lonely because of it here simply ends up not lonely by finding friends / found family. Cause that's the fucking annoying gotcha they always hurl at you "Oh if you don't have kids & live the life you want you'll be lonely!" As if you can't have friends. Also, plenty of ppl who do have kids wind up lonely because the kids end up hating them.

I'm all for the Doctor catching a break. Very touching, honestly. & he's like actually a point where he wouldn't just run off & get side-tracked or brood on the inevitability of its end. (like he would have when spent those years with River)

Also sets an interesting background for 15 of course, as he'll be coming out of it 'fully rested', in a sense.

So, yeah, I do think I'm looking forward to what 15 will get up to. It was sort of a great way to introduce him in such a way that ppl will instantly like him for how he comforts his past self here.

It's also probably the ideal ending for Donna, cause, much like Rose & Clara she wanted to stay forever, & maybe now that she has a daughter & other responsibilities she won't want the big danger all the time, but the Unit Job & living with the Doctor in a house? That's prolly what she would have wanted.

(I wonder if they'll end up running into Martha & Mickey at her job, since Donna & Martha were buds that time they met. )

[bloomshroomz]

I redesigned the polysexual flag.

I would love it if this got shared around!

Use it in art! Use it in merch! Use it on your pronouns.page! It's public domain! No credit needed!

Reasons for the redesign, flag meanings, additional flags, templates, silly stuff, and emojis below the cut.

As a polysexual person, I have mixed feelings about the original polysexual flag. The simplicity of the flag is good; it has three stripes and three colors. I also like the color choices in concept: pink for attraction to women, green for attraction to enbies, and blue for attraction to men. The contrast between the stripes is pretty good too, though the contrast between green and blue could use some improvement.

However, the hot pink clashes with the green, which can be displeasing to the eye, or even painful. This clashing isn't as bad on physical merch most of the time. I have some pins and bracelets where it looks just fine. But I think that it's important for the flag to be accessible online too, especially since many polysexual people can't show pride outside of online spaces.

There's also a problem with its similarity to the bisexual and pansexual flags. I know that this was done on purpose to show the identities being related, and I think that this is sorta fine. But...

It can be misleading, as I find that polysexuality is often fundamentally very different from the other "big four" multi-spec orientations, i.e. bi, pan, and omni. Polysexual people are not attracted to all genders, while bisexual people often are, and pansexual/omnisexual people always are. The lack of separation between the polysexual stripes implies that we're attracted to all genders as well, when we aren't.

It also makes it harder for us to stand out on our own. Polysexuality rarely gets its own spotlight independent from other identities. Most often, we just get a passing mention in a post about the broader multi-spec community, or get our flag shown in a post alongside several other flags, if we even get that at all. Our flag being so indistinct only furthers this invisibility.

Polysexuality, as a result, doesn't really get to be its own thing. We're just another tag, another flag, another passing mention of validity to tack onto a post that isn't really about us. This can feel really isolating, especially as many of us don't even strongly relate to the other identities that we're often grouped with.

I don't identify as bisexual, not even as an umbrella term, because I don't relate to common bisexual experiences. I am not attracted to binary men, and I'm not attracted to all genders. But "polysexual representation" is almost exclusively about common bisexual experiences, and it isn't ply-focused. The flag adds insult to injury.

So, I wanted to try to redesign the flag.

I like the colors that are already associated with polysexuality: pink, green, and blue. I want to keep these colors, and I'm also keeping their original meanings. The ply pride colors aren't changing if I have anything to say about it! As obscure as polysexuality is, this color combination is very recognizable and well established in our community, and if applied well, they look really nice together.

However, I've also added two thin white stripes to the flag. These stripes serve three purposes:

1. Visual appeal.

The white stripes prevent clashing between the pink and green, and also add some more contrast between the green and blue.

2. Separation between stripes.

The white stripes allow the colorful stripes to exist separately, since polysexual people are not attracted to all genders. For example, I am represented by pink and green, but not by blue, because I am not attracted to binary men. Another polysexual person might be represented only by green and blue, only by green, etc.

3. Distinction from other flags.

The white stripes create distinction from other m-spec flags. This flag distinction can represent the disconnect from m-spec spaces that some polysexuals experience, since m-spec spaces tend to revolve around attraction towards all genders, which is inapplicable to polysexual people unless varioriented or fluid. M-spec spaces also often revolve around attraction towards at least both binary genders, and many polysexual people, including myself, lack attraction towards at least one binary gender.

This flag distinction also calls attention to polysexuality as its own identity, which does not always need to be dependent on other terms, and can shine on its own. We are not just a tag, or just a flag, or just a label to put in posts that aren't about us. We are a community! We are individuals! We are people! We are experiences!

The flag is still somewhat similar to other m-spec flags in its color choices, so the solidarity with our m-spec siblings is still there! But now we get to have something that feels more like it's for us.

I hope that the difference in stripe size makes the flag more accessible to colorblind people as well, because I don't see many flags with a 2:1:2:1:2 stripe ratio, whereas there are a lot of flags with three evenly sized horizontal stripes.

This flag can be used by all ply people! Whether polysexual, polyromantic, polysensual, polyalterous, varioriented, fluid, questioning, etc... This is for all of us!

Additional flags, templates, silly stuff, and emojis:

[joys-of-everyday]

Wei Wuxian and the Difficulties of Morality

Wow so I did not realise how much discourse there was around Wei Wuxian and moral greyness. Let me erm… poke around a little because that’s a hobby of mine.

Btw, I usually write about SVSSS. This won’t change. This is a one-off thing (for now).

Firstly, an Anecdote

Fun story, I watched cql and the mdzs donghua with my mum. There were many memorable things that came out of this, but one of the relevant points is an offhanded comment from my mum. She said (translated into English): ‘Wei Wuxian has no face to show Jiang Cheng, because he broke his promise to stay by his side’ (1). For context, my mum grew up in a fairly traditional Asian household. They take their declarations of loyalty seriously (or at least, that is my impression).

I find this interesting, because when it comes to moral judgement, I (who grew up in the west, with a lot of western values) get far more hung up on the things WWX did, rather than some promise he made in his adolescence. Breaking a promise is not ideal, but in my books, doesn’t really count as a huge moral failing.

The point here is not to say anything about the ethics of promise breaking, but to illustrate a point. Different people have different values. Or one person can have conflicting values. There are many scenarios where it’s not possible to say with certainty what is right or wrong. This is moral ambiguity.

(Funnily enough, the issue that my dad took with WWX was the fact he was fiddling around with dead bodies, which was like… the least of my concerns, but then I realised that bodies have a lot of religious significance.)

What even is moral greyness?

There are two possible and equally valid definitions of moral greyness.

1. Characters who are not 100% evil or 100% good

2. Characters who do not fall into the categories of ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

Note that definition 2 is a strictly stronger definition than definition 1. It is not that hard to argue that WWX does not fall under definition 2, in that he is somehow overall ‘good’. (I would also argue that MXTX encourages you to not think too hard about these dichotomies, particularly via SVSSS, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day.) It is also not that hard to argue WWX does fall under definition 1. Mainly because it’s quite hard not to breathe without falling under definition 1.

The Two Kinds of Uncertainty  

When it comes to ethical questions, there are two uncertainties you naturally run into. Firstly, uncertainty of the world, which comes from having imperfect information about the situation or consequences of any given action. Secondly, uncertainty around the underlying moral question. Is it okay to sacrifice few for the sake of many? Should we place more value on those close to us in comparison to a stranger?

Humanity has not figured out morality, and certainly not for a lack of trying. Standards change over time. We look at the behaviour of our ancestors just a few hundred years ago with no small amount of repugnance. Most likely, in a few hundred years’ time our descendants will do the same. This isn’t to pass judgement on anything or anybody, but to make an observation that there is nothing you can do in the world that doesn’t inherently come with moral ambiguity, because there is always uncertainty – both of the world and the morals you are applying. And wherever there is moral ambiguity, there is moral greyness (definition 1).

That being said, ‘everything is morally grey’ is not really a helpful statement. There are things that we (society today) generally agree on e.g. ‘killing someone for no reason is bad’ or ‘being nice to people is good’. So the argument I want to posit today is that WWX’s moral greyness goes beyond this in a substantial way.

The Uncertain Character of WWX

The Fundamental Principle of MXTX is that all narrators are unreliable. At the bloodbath of the Nightless City, did WWX kill 5000? 3000? Far fewer? Had WWX acted in a different way, could JYL’s death have been avoided? We’ll never know.

To add to this complexity is subtle shifts in canon depending on the adaptation. WWX tortures Wen Chao pretty brutally in the novel (and even if you hate him, it’s a bit ick). In cql, it ‘fades to black’. In the donghua it’s a nice quick stab. Then there’s all of the fiddling around they did with JGY depending on the adaptations, giving him more or less blame for the events. I’m not sure if ‘novel is the only canon’ is the correct way to go, mainly because adaptation!WWX is interesting to analyse in itself. I won’t explore this too deeply here, but something to keep in mind.

Anyway, I want to argue that WWX is morally grey, through commentary on a few elements of his character.

1. The Horrors of War

WWX does a lot of things that are somewhat eyebrow raising. You know, killing people and stuff. Now it has been pointed out plenty of times that his situation was unusual (it was war!). The moralities surrounding warfare are in itself complicated. A pacifist might argue that war is no excuse for violence, but even without going to such extremes, these days we appreciate that there are some actions that cannot be condoned, even during times of coflict – this is the notion of war crimes.

War crimes are a surprisingly modern thing (people started to care a lot after the atrocities of WWII). Medieval warfare was brutal. Anyway, these include things like ‘torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments’ and ‘wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages’. Note that while killing large numbers of enemy soldiers doesn’t fall under war crimes (although some methods of going about this do, like biological weapons), torture does, so that’s one strike against book!WWX. Now there is subtly in these things, because if you judged people by these standards for anything more than 200 years old, basically everyone is committing war crimes without thinking too hard about it. WWX did do a lot of arguably good things in the Sunshot Campaign (whatever good means in war) – he fought against the tyranny of the Wens and was one of the key things that shifted the tides towards victory. Without him, the world might have looked a lot darker. Whether these ‘goods’ weigh over the ‘bads’ is something to think about.

On a slightly softer note, weapons of mass destructions are another cause of serious discussion. Those involved in the Manhattan Project creating the first atomic bomb weren’t exactly all war criminals (moreover, many of them genuinely believed they were doing what was right and necessary) but the consequences of their actions are what they are. So while WWX made the Yin Tiger Talley as a method of deterrence and assurance, considering the consequences of its use and the potential for future misuse, here lies another moral ambiguity.

2. Intent vs Consequences

It’s fair to say that most of the time, WWX’s intentions were good. Whether it be to protect the weak, to stand up for justice, these are all things we can get behind. The consequences of his actions? Well, JYL is dead, as well as a bunch of other people, and most the Wens didn’t survive anyway. That’s a big oof.

Now most people don’t subscribe to the strongest version of consequentialism which judges whether something is right or wrong by its consequences only. As in, for one, it’s almost impossible to apply in practice because you can’t predict the consequences of your actions at the point at which you chose to do them. Case in point, most of the consequences of WWX’s actions weren’t wholly down to WWX and it’s difficult to say if there was anything at all that he could have done to lead to a better outcome. (Arguably, WWX should have tried harder to negotiate with the rest of the cultivation world instead of being a one-man army against them, but in that case, they might have just mowed down the Wens anyway.)

Then again, I think most people do subscribe to at least a weak form of consequentialism. No matter how good the intentions, no matter how righteous and commendable… if the outcome is bad, it’s hard to label those actions as ‘good’ (play pumps is an example if you want to look into how charities can do more harm than good).

I draw no conclusions here. It’s food for thought.

3. On Conflicting Values and Lose-Lose Scenarios

A lot of the above comes from applying modern ethics to a character in a world largely based on ‘Ancient China’ (the quotation marks from the fact Ancient China is several thousands years old and changes significantly over time). We do this all the time. Hell, people are still reimagining the Three Kingdoms and making commentary on the morality of Cao Cao (155-220). MDZS makes a lot of commentary on modern social issues (the ‘mob mentality’ of MDZS feels like Weibo/twitter lol), so viewing it through a modern lens makes sense.

But let’s put that aside for a second and return to my mum’s comment about WWX’s broken promise. By traditional values, family is important. In Confucianism, the Four Virtues are ‘loyalty’, ‘filial piety’, ‘continence’, and ‘righteousness’. To illustrate just how serious family was, in the conflict between Liu Bang and Xiang Yu, Xiang Yu at some point threatened to kill Liu Bang’s father. Then Liu Bang was like ‘we’re sworn brothers, so technically he’s your father too’, and Xiang Yu didn’t kill him, because it would be unfilial to do so. All this is to say, WWX turning his back on his sect and his family was a big deal. Equally, loyalty towards a superior was valued greatly, even towards eyebrow raising superiors.

But Confucianism also teaches the importance of things like ‘righteousness’ and ‘benevolence’. Throughout many dynasties, important people have cared a lot about the grievances of the masses. Bullying the weak and hoarding power unjustly is seen as one of the ultimate evils, a big reason for a leader to lose the Mandate of Heaven, thus becoming unfit to rule. Plenty of subordinates have stood up against the tyranny of their superiors. So WWX standing up to the evils of the Jin clan is highly commendable by these standards too.

Another thing is ‘paying back your benefactors’. In the west, although we do have concepts like ‘owing a life’, I don’t think it’s as strong??? This is also serious business. In the Three Kingdoms, Cao Cao spared his enemy general Guan Yu, and later Guan Yu briefly fought for Cao Cao even though he was an enemy, in order to repay this debt. Wen Ning and Wen Qing saved WWX’s life and helped him when he was in need – WWX has a moral obligation to help them in return.

Thus we see WWX between a rock and hard place. Turn away from the Jiangs and he turns away from his family, and from someone he promised his loyalty to. But turn a blind eye to the treatment of the Wens, and he is a not only allowing evil to go unchallenged, but also abandoning his benefactors. The game is rigged. There is no right move here. Morally ambiguity -> moral greyness.

(Note: A lot of the previous two points can also be viewed from a 'traditional' lens. Mohism has been arguing about pacifism and universal love since 400BC. Taoism has many things to say about intervening in world affairs. Life has always been complicated, and while our language/framework may shift, many of the underlying questions remain.)

(Second note: my knowledge of Chinese philosophy is all the stuff I learnt in Saturday school+a few books/youtube videos aka. not a lot. Please call me out if I'm sprouting nonsense.)

Let’s wrap up

Tl;dr WWX is a morally grey character.

And I haven’t even started on what went down at the Nightless City, or how interesting (read: morally sus) his methods of murder were, or his fantastic takes on risk assessment.

Maybe he’s good overall. Maybe he’s a hero. But heroes too can be morally grey. That’s just a part of life.

1. This is really hard to translate actually, and I think the way I’ve written it makes sense but comes across stronger than it was. More literally it was ‘can’t raise his head towards’. It was sort of explaining why JC was giving WWX a lot of shit later on and WWX wasn’t arguing back, more in a sympathetic way rather than a critical way.

As usual, thank you for reading! Comments and criticism appreciated, but I may be significantly slower getting back because my brain is in svsss mode rn :)

[hanarchy]

i think like. my relation to beauty/looks whatever is largely defined by knowing that people who are conventionally attractive just have more power over other people, especially men. Like a lot of men see conventionally attractive women as a status symbol or as an aspirational thing-to-own and that means they will listen to them more.

it’s also just proven sociologically that people who are perceived as attractive make more money, get hired, get promoted more. and on that level i feel inadequate. Like I wish I could have that power, I wish I had the power for people to look at me and go ‘whoa’. So occasionally I will feel terrible about my looks and my style and like everything about how I present myself.

But tbh me being that is as much of a fantasy as me being able to fly and I mean that so seriously. I am so fundamentally uncomfortable with performing femininity like 90% of the time. Even if it is like bad-ass femininity or whatever. Like any flavor of it makes me uncomfortable. I have moments where I enjoy it but they are getting fewer and further in between as I get older.

And then obviously there’s the matter of my body just genetically. I could be a lot fitter and be perceived as a lot more attractive, I could tan and wear makeup and learn how to do my hair but frankly and honestly…. I’m just never gonna be the ideal of beauty that is prevalent in society. I’d have to at the very least get a nose job and likely more surgery to achieve that and plastic surgery just starts to show at some point so thats futile anyway. And doing all of these things, even before the plastic surgery is so fucking expensive and i would just rather spend the money i have on other things.

and then finally, like the end of it is this: I don’t want to do all that. Like I might be convinced to do it all and change everything about myself if i was guaranteed to be perceived as beautiful and to get more out of life because of it. But for all the reasons mentioned I would never be guaranteed it and even if i /did/ achieve the model look or whatever i am very certain that would a) come with its own problems and b) still not make up for other areas where i lack and c) drain a lot of energy that i already dont have.

Like it’d tbh be an unnatural state for me, it would mean eating very little and exercising a lot and all the things i just mentioned and it still would not be guaranteed. I would just rather have a nice life than chase that. Not to mention that society is literally working against all of us in redefining what’s considered beautiful every 3 years.

[starphyre-blooms]

I am having a feeling. It is a feeling that I do not like. What I like even less than having the feeling is the process of letting it go. Step one to having an uncomfortable feeling is allowing yourself to feel it. Admittedly, this is the part of having an uncomfortable feeling that I am the worst at. 😬🫣.

This type of education is one that is not taught in schools. Without a parent that has the capacity to navigate their own emotional experience, children are left to navigate their emotional bodies on their own. Something a child is not well equipped to do, making this very important work for people of all ages. Traditional education excels at instilling academic knowledge, often over looking holistic teachings which can be such a useful aid to so many. Understanding our bodies, beyond just their physical state of being can bring emotional balance and physical health.

Caring for the self is rarely taught, as we are taught to prioritize becoming high functioning (read, income producing) members of society. We are taught to neglect ourselves in the name of hard work, making the almighty dollar almost god like in the eyes of so many. Similarly, the necessary skills to recognize and outgrow toxic relationships ends up lacking. The crucial skill set of setting boundaries, respecting our own needs and cultivating relationships that help us grow is not found in our k-12 school systems. Education should nurture us as a whole entity, not just a physical one. We grow up and wonder how some people seem completely devoid of emotional intelligence.

So, what is this feeling that emerges from my heart space, encapsulating my entire being? Where does it stem from? What is its origin? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with “B” and ends with a “ YYYYYYYYYY😭😭😭😭😭😭😭.”

😬🫣

Let’s call him Matt. My journey into reiki started at the beginning of this calendar year. I was in a dark place and in serious need of emotional healing. I prayed before my altar for my deities to help me through my pain, and to send me true, divine, everlasting love. Then, Matt started popping up on my “For You” page on the popular app, TikTok. When I first saw him there was an instant moment of recognition. I wrote it off as wishful thinking, but continued to tune into him because his reiki felt so nice to me. Then, out of nowhere, he slid into my DMs. I was delighted, remembering that moment of instant recognition. For days before the first interaction I kept seeing his face pop into my minds eye as he would go back and forth about whether or not I would think he was a creep if he reached out to me(part of being psychic). The night before our first interaction, I had a dream he sent me a message, then woke up to a message. Being psychic, this sort of stuff is common for me in romantic soulmate relationships, but normally I have to have…… a physical exchange with someone before I can connect with them like this.

My experience of “soulmates” is as follows: we are all one, so we are all soulmates. Every interaction we have teaches us something about ourselves, making us all the master and the student. That barista that gets your order wrong almost every time? Maybe a lesson in speaking up for ourselves, or a chance to practice patience and compassion. That parent that is very negative? Perhaps a lesson in not needing external validation. There are many types of soulmates, but I think we glorify the romantic soulmate because of all of the fundamental lessons we learn in those types of relationships.

That being said, I know Matt is my soulmate 👻💕👻. After that interaction, my experience of his reiki would become much more intense. The more intimately we connected, the more intense I could feel him. Instead of healing, I would be struck by hot waves of passion as his reiki tingled parts of my body that I can’t show in public. I could feel him breathing on my skin through whatever device I watched him on. My body went from having emotional releases in response to his reiki, to wanting to have a very physical release. Then, just like that, his interactions stopped coming.

This activated my attachment system. Persons with an anxious attachment style (like me) have a deep fear of abandonment. I was being emotionally abandoned by someone that I had gone to for healing and solace for so long. For someone with an anxious attachment style, this is felt much more intensely. You see, for someone with an anxious attachment style, even someone leaving physically, and temporarily can trigger the anxious partner into a frenzy where they are overwhelmed with fear and anxiety. Abandonment fear is necessary for evolution purposes. Fear of abandonment keeps us close to others, and therefore, more likely to survive. We are all hardwired to fear abandonment. It is in our DNA. Persons with an anxious attachment style, however, have actually experienced intense abandonment, repeatedly throughout their lives, usually starting from childhood. These people fight much harder to prevent this abandonment, or even the threat of, often times in some dramatic fashion. Persons with anxious attachment will resort to what is known as “protest behaviors” to keep their partner from abandoning them. This can look like frequent communication so they know that you haven’t forgotten about them and suddenly and without warning stopped loving them. When this, or the perception of this, occurs, it is completely devastating to the anxiously attached.

Matt has an avoidant attachment style. Persons with avoidant attachment are prone to disappear or use a series of techniques to keep emotional distance from partners or potential partners. This happens because there was no emotional safety involved in the upbringing of the avoidant partner.

We were getting close, so he was pulling away. This was not a healthy dynamic for me, and on a conscious level I knew I should have just walked away right then and there. My subconscious programming wouldn’t let me. My subconscious programming needed the connection to be completely obliterated before I could let go and walk away. There are other layers. I knew Matt cared for me, as I mentioned before, I am psychic. I could still feel his energy attached to me, even though he was no longer directing his attention towards me, in an overt way.

After much ruminating, I found myself asking:

[pcrtgasdace]

Thoguhts on the one piece live action? I was skeptical at first but I’m kinda excited now 👀 and who would you like to see cast as the rest of the crew?

I am excited! At first I was skeptical too, long before the cast was announced actually... because the reputation of live action adaptations speaks for itself... But this cast? They've charmed me, honestly. And I think it says a lot that Oda chose them and met them and agreed with the choices.

The cast ifself exceeds such strawhat energy and they are all so genuine and excited!! And you can see them trying not to let the pressure get to them by being optimistic. I mean, they've done their research, they're interactive with the fandom, they're fans themselves and I'm optimistic overall that their acting performances will be well done.

I am not nitpicking about certain changes in character design like the lack of Usopp's ridiculously long nose or Sanji's eyebrow. They look fine as it is. I think people have to realise that when adapting into another medium you can't just do it 1:1... it wouldn't work, it would seem like a cosplay movie that doesn't take itself seriously. Being open for creative changes is the only way to look at a live action and so far I'm actually looking forward to see what they've accomplished. And I can't wait to introduce others to OP this way, especially my dad, lol.

I am not setting my expectations too high, but if the OP LA show can at least be entertaining in it's own right and be a somewhat cringy but still fun watch, I am totally fine with that! I am not expecting a master piece. I just hope they don't squeeze too much into little episodes.

The CGI is something I am not too fond of, regarding the sea dragon mostly, I am sure they could do better, but I thought Luffy's stretching looks just as ridiculous as I imagined! In a good way. Because that's his power! The devil fruit is meant to be crazy and silly! And I think with the shot we've seen it looked fairly decent.

I was impressed that they did the green hair with Zoro, I was actually not sure they'd do it because it's hard to get the right tone in real life and make it not look bad. But they did a good job, honestly. The action sequences we've seen so far also looked promising.

I love that the team and cast are dedicated to be close to the source material as possible, but still take different approaches and do minor changes.

I am so excited about a lot of things actually, seeing little Luffy and SHANKS (Peter Gadiot as Shanks is still a casting I am so so hyped about!). Luffy's and Zoro's meeting and the little girl trying to feed Zoro the rice balls... they've already casted those characters so we will definitely get to see those moments and I am wondering how emotional Arlong Park is going to be - especially the Nami-stabbing scene (if they even do it, but I'd really hope they won't erase this fundamental moment).

If the LA ever gets that far, I could see Anya Chalotra actually as a nice Robin, even though she isn't Russian she's got the tan and looks and she can act. But then again, I don't really have a preference - I trust the team to find the right people. Though I have seen some fancasts like Elizaveta Boyarskaya and Yulia Persild that I liked.

Yasmeen Fletcher as Vivi, also a fancast, but a good one.

I am pretty open about that, I mean, see how nice the cast is we got. We don't need big Hollywood names. But then again, if big Hollywood actors WANT to be a part of it, then why not? Jaime Lee Curtis loves One Piece and it would be awesome if she could play Dr Kureha. I am pretty sure if the show suceeds and continues that they'd invite her into this. Anyway, it's still time left and we can only wait and see how the show turns out. Either way, I am optimistic and even if it turns out bad, it won't change my opinion of the cast - they don't deserve any hate or negativity for simply doing their job. You can't make everyone happy and that's it.

[17yearslatewithlattes]

In an effort to keep myself sane in what’s clearly gonna be a series of John episodes I’m (mostly) condensing my John rage to one post. Just ignore me I’ve gotta get it out somewhere.

Every time I think I must be being too hard on John he makes the mistake of showing up on screen and I have to dig a deeper hole to bury my expectations for him

John: I need your help finding an incredibly dangerous magical gun.

Dean and Sam: Cool. Mind telling us it’s special powers so we know what to look out for:

John: No.

—

Okay I know this is the men refusing to communicate show, but even by spn standards John’s categorical refusal to give his sons basic information relevant to cases and their baseline survival is genuinely starting to feel pathological at this point.

At first I thought I was just being mean and petty by theorizing that it was a control tactic to keep them dependent on him, but I’m struggling to see any other explanation at this point. 

Edit: Okay having watched the whole episode I suppose he’d say that absolute unquestioning obedience is the best guarantor of safety. If I put in the work of remembering that John was in the army I can dredge up some empathy through recognizing that this thinking was no doubt aggressively drilled into him. 

That being said, that kinda authoritarian thinking does SO much damage wherever it’s found, and when it’s coming from a parent? Yikes. And it cannot continue to function without a high degree of arrogance, self-aggrandizing, and tearing down of those ‘under’ you (all of which we see John engaging in constantly). In John’s case it also requires a certain fundamental lack of curiosity and refusal to learn when the results are constantly exposing the fundamental flaws in the approach.

—

I will fully own that I’m being petty with this, but: I would like to observe that after however long searching for a way to kill the yellow-eyed demon, when John finds out about the colt it is %100 disconnected from any of the research he insists he’s doing. He pulled a letter found by his sons out of their hands and by pure chance it says ‘go here for the kill everything gun’. 

Wait now I say that out loud I stand by it, that’s a solid point in the ‘John is a shit hunter who builds up his own legend by belittling his sons and taking credit for their accomplishments column.’

Here’s the petty part: maybe if John was capable of maintaining any relationship at all Elkins would have just told him about the gun instead of John having to wait all these years to learn about it by accident (through his sons being smart and good at their jobs).

—

Credit where it is due. I was pleasantly surprised by John’s talk with Sam about why he raised them that way and why he responded so horrifically to Sam leaving for college. There’s plenty I take issue with in the particulars of the speech, but when push comes to shove that was a lot closer to an apology and involved something a whole lot closer to genuine introspection than I expected.

He’s given enough reason to distrust him that I do think it may (at least in part) be a manipulation tactic; placating Sam so he’ll stick around until John’s had use of him. But I would like Sam to have that catharsis and will give John the benefit of the doubt unless he forces me to rescind it.

—

However, just in case I was considering softening towards John, the first thing he does after being nice to Sam for five seconds is use Dean as bait. I would like to observe that this is the first possible opportunity John has had during the show for using Dean as bait on a hunt and he is TAKING it.

—

I would like to note that John shows 0 interest in saving the vampire’s captives at any point of this episode. I mean he’d likely have gotten around it to (assuming he’d noticed they were there) but I don’t actually have any concrete reason to assume that without once again giving him the benefit of the doubt when he’s done nothing to earn it. Funny that

—

Minimal credit time part 2: This time when his son’s save his life John actually admits it instead of making them feel like it was was their fault he was in trouble in the first place. And look, going back to the authoritarianism thing, admitting that their disobeying an order had a positive effect, even going so far as to change his mind about his insistence on going it alone that he’s been so didactic about really does seem like a big deal to him, and as infuriating as his behavior has been this episode, taken by itself this episode really looks like it could be a turning point towards John learning to be a better father and building a more positive relationship with his sons. 

Like really truly I like when characters learn and grow and I think it’d be awesome if Sam and Dean’s relationship with their father improved. If I hadn’t spent so much time in Supernatural I really think I’d be holding out a bit of hope for this man right now.

Unfortunately for my optimism on this point I have spent so much time on Supernatural tumblr

—

I have Thoughts about John’s relentless “it’s because I care about you” excuse for every action he takes. However they are still formulating and I have a funny feeling that it’s gonna keep coming up in the next two episodes, so I’ll let those simmer for now.

[fremedon]

Brickclub 5.2.2, “The Ancient History of the Sewer”

This really is a weird chapter, and the book seems to know that--it orients us in the same way it’s introduced all our other grand and horrific setpieces (Waterloo, the convent, the barricade): by inviting us to consider the shape of a letter of the alphabet:

You will form a more accurate picture of this strange geometrical plan if you suppose that you are looking at some bizarre oriental alphabet, lying flat on a dark background, all jumbled up, and the misshaped letters welded together in apparent confusion and as if hapahazardly, sometimes end to end, sometimes at angles to each other.

Except this alphabet is illegible. (And also racist, but it’s not just a foreign alphabet, it’s an alphabet stripped of all sense even to people who know the language.)

The other letter-locations were grotesque, and sometimes sublime, but fundamentally comprehensible in a way this place is not--even while Hugo appears to be changing his argumentative strategy to an appeal to economics, he’s telling us this isn’t going to make a neat narrative.

@everyonewasabird‘s writeup points out how odd it is that Hugo is appealing to truth here, and praising the sewer as a final arbiter of truth, in a book that’s always been very pro-lying. I don’t think I fully have a handle on what Hugo’s doing, but I think this passage is doing some heavy lifting:

The sewer is the city’s conscience. Everything converges here and is brought face to face here. In this ghastly place there are shadows but there are no more secrets. Each thing has its true form, or at least its definitive form.

That’s a nice distinction but I think a very useful one: the sewer may reveal secrets--but that’s not necessarily the same thing as Truth (as Valjean’s confession will make painfully clear).

Hugo continues:

The pile of filth has this in its favour: it does not lie. ... This farrago is a confession. No more false appearances here, no possibly plastering-over; filth takes off its shirt; stark nakedness, all illusions and mirages dispelled, nothing other than what is, showing the ugly face of what is finished with. ... This is more than fraternity, this is intimacy. Everything that used to pretty itself is now besmirched. The last veil is torn off. A sewer is a cynic: It tells all.

Bird points out that the modern, post-Napoleonic sewer is basically Javert: yet another best instantiation of a bad system; so effective and efficient at consigning people to oblivion that the bourgeoisie never needs to be troubled by them.

But this is still the ancient ancient sewer--and it’s a cynic, a pile of filth that, whatever its other issues, at least doesn’t lie.

That’s Grantaire. That’s the cynicism that looks at the worst of humanity and thinks that a lack of comforting fictions is the same as truth.

In Hugo’s historical scheme, where the ancient sewer is the ancien regime, I think this is the view that crime and misery happen because some people are Just Bad, and the only reason to look deeper into them is for the thrill of horror; while the modern sewer is the society that understands that these things have reasons and causes and still would rather sweep them out of sight than address them.

And I think--I hope--we are meant to understand that this isn’t a wholly accurate view, and that the revelation of secret shames and sins doesn’t actually permit the kind of magical reconstruction the last paragraphs describe, from the last sentence:

In what remains, it finds what has been--good, evil, falsehood, truth, the bloodstain from the law courts, the ink-blot from the cavern, the drop of candle grease from the brothel, ordeals suffered, temptations welcomed, orgies spewed up, the kink that characters have acquired in abasing themselves, the trace of prostitution in souls whose coarseness made them capable of it, and in the jerkins of Rome’s street porters the imprint of Messalina’s elbow.

We know what makes a person capable of prostitution in this book, and it’s not coarseness of soul. Whatever secrets are revealed here--in the lowest mine, among the people society wants to throw away and forget--may seem, to someone looking in from above, like they’re telling their full stories. But we’ve seen those stories, and seen what little trace they leave; and we know that’s not true.

[straysinfiltrator]

Can I ask about your reaction to that pizza delivery Reddit post? I’m neurodivergent and I see where you’re coming from with that - but that doesn’t dismiss the fact that people often need help and don’t have support networks in place that make it possible for them to initiate that interaction of receiving care. At least, that seems to be apt for the situation that had been described. I get if that comes from a personal response, to feeling intruded upon, but I’ve had times in my life where I very much had to rely on someone else for care, or just to break out of my shell and try new stuff outside of my immediate comfort zone that I enjoyed and connected with, but wouldn’t have done on my own or without urging. My initial response was honestly to tell you log off and go touch grass, mostly because I’m in my own curated space where people talk about this stuff, about the need for community and the way isolation hurts whether or not it’s self-imposed, so when I though of it that way I just wanted to ask? Maybe converse about that? Idk, ultimately we’re strangers on the internet and you have no obligation to engage further

I think the paternalistic aspect of the interaction is what really got me upset. The fact that the pizza place enforced the person not ordering from them more than once a week massively changes the tone of the interaction for me, from offering help to telling someone how to live their lives. Their thinking in how they approached this also shows a lack of awareness that some people need sameness in their diet and get bullied over it all the time. I don’t usually engage with this stuff on tumblr but I thought calling out that last aspect was particularly important, perhaps on behalf of my younger, newly immigrant and undiagnosed autistic self who would have smiled and nodded along and mentally cataloged this as one more instance in which I need to take greater care to hide the ways in which I’m not “normal” both due to my neurodivergence and my foreign-ness.  If it wasn't for that particular aspect of the interaction, I think it would have been a nice story indeed.

I’m glad you found a supportive community and you raise a good point about the importance of reaching out when people might not ask for support. But I think a community cannot be supportive unless it respects individual wishes and differences. It's one thing to choose to be in a support group that pushes you in a way that you feel is healthy; but when it comes to social interactions with strangers that we don't choose but we need to have in order to live our lives, like ordering food, the dynamics are different and I'm massively set off by strangers intervening against our wishes to tell us how to live our lives better. 

With regard to self-isolation also, I’d say it’s a crucial difference whether someone’s isolation it’s self-imposed or not. The most isolating feeling in my life is when well-meaning people try to push me out of my comfort zone rather than understanding my needs. ‘Community’ looks like different things for different people. A community that respects someone's need to be alone (or to eat the same thing all the time) is a supportive community in the same way that a partner who respects their spouse’s wish to not be hugged is showing affection through their distance. I hope my post didn't upset you. It wasn't my intention to do that to anyone, but I did feel the need to raise awareness that this sort of well-meaning interference needs to be done with the greatest care and with a fundamental respect for the personal choices that others make in how they live their own lives.

[gloryextinct]

okay so now to tie all the crowley posting together (on crowley's care and interests, on crowley being "good"). the final fight of the series happens not just because aziraphale and crowley disagree with each other (which they do, that's why they keep having the same argument over and over again), but also because aziraphale has misunderstood something extremely fundamental to crowley as a person. we as the audience know that crowley would never want to be an angel again, but aziraphale doesn't. aziraphale, like the fans, has fallen into the trap of looking completely past the demonic persona that crowley projects, and only seeing the good inside him. and yes, crowley does play up the whole demon bit out of fear and to keep himself safe, especially during s1. but only looking at the good parts of crowley is a problem because it's not entirely a façade for him. crowley is mess of contradictions, he's good but he's not benevolent, he's manipulative and cunning but also caring and passionate, he's kind but his kindness is often selfish. and s2 crowley is really struggling with all that, he hasn't yet been able to reconcile all the different parts of himself to figure out the kind of person he wants to be without a hellish influence over him. that's why he's still in contact with hell, he doesn't know what to do with himself without it. 

he told aziraphale that the angel he was before isn't him anymore, and he wasn't just saying that to throw aziraphale off the fact that he was lying about killing the goats and the children. falling changed crowley, it traumatized him and he'll never be able to regain that innocence, love and joy that he once had. it's forced him to do things he never would've before and to learn new things about himself. and he does actually like some of the ways he's changed. crowley is angry and resentful and hurt about being cast out of heaven unfairly, but he doesn't regret falling and he also doesn't hate the person that falling made him into. he hates hell, and he hates his lack of freedom because of hell, but he doesn't hate being a demon. he not out here secretly wanting to be good, but being unable to (except surreptitiously) because of his allegiance to hell. crowley denies it when people call him nice or good for a lot of reasons; it's opposite to the carefully crafted image of himself that he presents to people, for awhile doing good could put him in a lot of danger, and also crowley recognizes the expectations that come with being perceived as good and doesn't want to be beholden to them. he just wants to be able to choose to be good for himself and for his own reasons, just as much as he wants to be able to choose to be bad for himself and his own reasons.

aziraphale doesn't understand that about crowley though. he doesn't understand that the reason crowley's car is black, and that he always drives it so fast, and blasts loud music is because crowley likes it like that. it's not an act, he just likes being like that. and i think the bentley is the perfect object to show that tension because it's really easy to make an argument that crowley dresses the way he does and furnished his apartment the way he did to maintain a certain image of himself. but crowley just unreservedly loves the bentley. the car's not the way it is because he's trying to seem cool and demonic, it's like that because he loves it that way.

sidebar, but i also think it's an interesting comparison to see how aziraphale and crowley both act alone in each other's spaces. crowley's behaviour is pretty unobtrusive. he doesn't like when he doesn't have anything to do so he's just in there rearranging the books with jim. we don't know exactly why, whether he's alphabetizing them to make them easier to find, or if he's moving books from piles on the floor to shelves, or sorting through new acquisitions, or if he's fixing the mess that jim's been making. the point is that he's not fundamentally changing anything about the shop, just moving it around a little bit. it feels more similar to his regular role in their relationship where most of the time crowley's not actually making aziraphale do something he doesn't want to, he's just providing him with excuses to do what he wanted to do already but felt he shouldn't. crowley is much more familiar with aziraphale's boundaries than aziraphale is of his because honestly crowley kind of lets him do whatever he wants. i don't think aziraphale changing the bentley is supposed to mean that aziraphale actually wants to change crowley, but i do think it's meant to show just how much aziraphale doesn't fully understand crowley either from genuine ignorance or because he's convinced himself otherwise for his own sense of self. crowley usually lets aziraphale get away with a lot, and i think aziraphale has absolutely no idea of what crowley's boundaries actually are. i'm sure he knew that crowley would be unhappy about him changing the car but from his perspective this would resolve in one of two ways: crowley wouldn't be happy about it, but ultimately he'd let aziraphale do it anyway because he's let him get away with changing the car before when he put the bike rack on, or crowley would grumble about it because he felt he had to but he would secretly really like it. both of those are key parts of their established dynamic. i think that if aziraphale had known that crowley would be actually be upset about the changes enough to demonically intervene, he probably wouldn't have done it. and just like with the offer to return to heaven, we as the audience know that this is something crowley will hate and object too, because crowley loves his car with its mind of its own and penchant for turning all music into queen eventually. but somehow aziraphale had missed that

in s2, crowley doesn't act all that different from how he did in s1. yes, he's much more comfortable and open in his affection and devotion to aziraphale, because after millenia he finally can be. one could even argue that he's a little less mean to other people than he was before. but otherwise, he's not all that different. so it's probably a good time to talk about crowley's façade then, the demonic pretense that he maintains. crowley is, in the show and the book, absolutely driven by his anxiety and fear. but he can't actually let himself be seen as afraid in hell, so he's had to develop ways of functioning through his fear, without letting on to how he's actually feeling. in the show, he'll get angry instead, being far more prone to cruelty than usual. in all canons, crowley really has a fake it til you make it mentality, and he's so careful about the way he presents himself to the world. 

in the show especially both crowley and aziraphale have a complicated relationship with the truth, chronic liars that they are. aziraphale biggest problem is that he lies to himself constantly whenever something is difficult or challenging to his worldview. he often says things that he should know are lies, that deep down he has doubts about but that he forces himself to believe anyway. meanwhile crowley's problem is that he's had to lie about himself for so long that he's no longer entirely sure which of those lies are actually true. this is even further complicated by the fact that crowley likes putting on an act up until a certain point. as michael and david talked about in an interview, crowley's ideal date is having aziraphale drag him out to things so he can complain the whole time but he'll actually really be enjoying himself. how much of his demon act is truly him and how much is faked? this is a question that aziraphale is constantly having to ask when he's interacting with crowley, and it's an impossible question to answer because crowley isn't entirely sure himself. in s1, aziraphale was much more cautious about the way he handled their relationship, and because of that, he can come off as very cruel to him. 

in some ways, i think that pre-armageddon!aziraphale has a better understanding of the balancing act that is crowley than he does afterwards. he still acknowledges that crowley is a demon while also knowing about his goodness. after armageddon though... aziraphale has had to come up with some complex justifications for why everything turned out the way it did while still not being willing to let go of some of his core beliefs. what he's landed on is that, "god is good and right, but heaven is broken because it was being run by bad angels who were going against the divine plan because they're not infallible beings," and then by extension "crowley is actually good because he stopped the world from ending, and all of the demon act is him pretending. because he's good and because heaven is not infallible, it was actually a mistake for him to have fallen from heaven." being able to openly acknowledge the problems with heaven even superficially is a step forward for aziraphale, but he has to take a step back from understanding crowley to do it. crowley falling was unfair and unjustified, but it wasn't a mistake. he fell for a reason, and that reason troubles him deeply and has directly led to him becoming the way he is in the present. 

i don't really blame aziraphale for missing a lot of these important truths about crowley because crowley has never made it easy for him or anyone else. originally it was a tactic to protect himself, but after armageddon crowley's finally allowed to take off the mask and he doesn't really know how anymore. or maybe it's less of a mask and more of his face at this point. and that's the problem, isn't it? he just doesn't know. even when crowley still reported to hell, he never went in on the violence or the torture. he's disgusted by bigotry and brutality, and he always has been. he wasn't even all that good at faking interest or pleasure over it. in s2, it seems like he's also stopped doing all his usual demonic mischief, and yet he's still deeply unhappy and adrift. all aziraphale knows though is that it seems like crowley's not bothering to spread malice or tempt people anymore now that he doesn't work for hell, so maybe he never wanted to in the first place? and since crowley doesn't talk to him about how he's feeling, doesn't seem to want to talk to anyone about it, why would aziraphale have any reason to assume otherwise?

crowley spends the first 2 episodes of s2 being extremely upset for the entire time and for mostly good reasons. that begins to change though, in ep 3. crowley's suddenly got a job again, and he does so much better mentally when he's not just sitting idle. and that job isn't to tidy the bookshop, which he's mostly doing to ease his anxiety, or to babysit jim, which he's honestly deeply resentful about. the job is to come up with and execute some kind of plan to manipulate a person into falling in love. needing to plan and manipulate is already checking two big boxes for crowley, and he's clearly having a great time. and it continues like that through the rest of the series. the moments where crowley seems to be enjoying himself the most happen when he's doing more typical demonic activity. he loves lying! and scamming! and manipulating! he loves being a nuisance! he's meddlesome, cantakerous and he loves mocking. when he tricks muriel into breaking him into heaven, he should be scared out of his mind but instead he's hamming it up and clearly having a great time. he has a ton of fun watching aziraphale bribe and coerce a bunch of people into coming to his party. he loves this shit! despite how stressed he is, crowley manages to find these little moments of joy by being a mischievous little scamp. 

crowley is a creative and imaginative person, and he's always been the type to fight better with his mind than his fists. for such a long time, crowley has been channeling his creativity into his demonic work and it is something that does genuinely bring him happiness. in the process of realizing that crowley is actually capable of doing good, aziraphale has forgotten, ignored or even failed to recognize the ways in which crowley is not good, despite it being equally important to who crowley is. this fundamental misunderstanding of crowley, and both of their inabilities to stop lying about everything all the time contributed to their disagreement at the end of the season

[boozy-and-brazen]

I do not know who I am

I don’t know if my scathing hatred of people I’ve known for years is a sickness in my mind

If it is a frustration over the lack of perfection that plagues the world

If it is my own true feelings that have been covered up by years of a false or maybe real kindness I portray to the world

I don’t know if it is something I should act on or if I should remain silent and tortured

If I should act, then which basis do I act on? Am I hateful towards some of the closest people I have?

Am I fundamentally judgmental and paranoid?

Is it something I have neglected to consider altogether?

Or is it my worst fear. A horrible, evil combination of everything put together.

I do not know what I look like.

I don’t think most people have that internal perception.

But what terrifies me is that it doesn’t seem like anyone else knows what I look like either. When friends try to create computer or artistic renderings of me, they always preface it with they just can’t get it right, there is something missing. And I agree.

My lover always calls me pretty. Beautiful even. And yet when prompted he can not say why or how.

Every celebrity or character comparison I’ve received has simply been a clear observation of my hair, which I already change with frequency because I am incapable of finding a “look” that feels like me.

The only description I can receive is smart and nice. Smart and nice. On occasion, from my parents and my best friend who I’ve never felt more disconnected from during our whole friendship than now, I will here that I am strong and persistent. Granted, many people believe that I contain unbelievable amounts of these characteristics.

But the truth is I do not feel that any of this is accurate.

In my mind I contain scathing criticisms, annoyance, distrust, and disgusting and degrading opinions of everyone I have ever met.

In no way do I feel nice.

What people see as intelligence is a result of huge amounts of a hyper critical mindset and what most people would kindly call a perfectionist view.

I work myself to the bone so that when the occasion arises I can be Einstein and Churchill and Jobs and Rockefeller and Morgan and Luther and the other Luther and every brilliant man there ever was except as a woman except I don’t even know if that is true either.

Even when I am sick at the doctors and struggling to breathe, the specialists in the room look at me and say that there is absolutely nothing that they can think of that will explain the medical anomaly plaguing my body before they tell me to relax and go home. I spend my time imagining hobbies that at the end of the day I know I can’t do because not a single part of my body or mind can accept the idea that I may fail.

I can’t paint because the product may be bad, I can’t crotchet because it may be a waste of money, I can’t do sports because the furthest I can ever get is mediocre at best, I can’t even read because any time I do I must read the page 5 times, and the next one 6 because I am groveling over how I struggle to do the thing people learn at 7.

My defining characteristics to the world are smart and nice, to one person pretty with no explanation, and unfortunately strong to those who had to witness me at my worst.

None of these have ever felt correct, and can easily be explain by some form of obligation or persistence. Even if they were true, I cannot say I would be happy knowing that is who I am. I both more and less than that.

Smart and nice, pretty to some, and painfully determined don’t make up a person.

Then again, I don’t know what does.

Every effort I make to become one feels like an exhausting act that I can’t bear to put on.

I wish everyday that I could be a background character in a tv show, or a npc in a video game.

Maybe if I’m lucky, one day I will wake up as a clear defined archetype with predictable goals and easily understandable motivations.

Maybe some main character (that is still there to represent any normal everyday person) will pass me by and witness my selected and perfected craft that will later come in handy for a quest of theirs. I would have a recognizable face and a style that people could categorize as emo or prep or goth or cottage core or artisty or alternative.

And better yet, my skills and personality and responses will fit perfectly with how I look.

I fear that the girls in middle school who said I was too depressing to be around were right. That is where I feel comfortable. Being sad, in pain, and alone are what feels natural to me. I may not be destined to be anything else. I suppose that is a type of side character. But those ones are often neglected or are killed off early. I don’t think I’m that, at least I don’t want to think that I am. Something in me tells me that that is not my role, but that something also refuses to say what my calling is.

Maybe I am just crazy. A bottle of crazy contained in a vacuum sealed, impossible to open jar that maybe will one day shatter and destroy everything in its path as it explodes into a million pieces.

One can only hope that this day comes soon and the pain and destruction is swift, so that in its wake this bundle of confusion leaves either beautiful crystals that reveal the most amazing work of art, or absolutely nothing at all.