#like the original sin will always outweigh anything positive that comes after

[mermaidsirennikita]

What gets me that a lot of the time questionable/bad behaviour from the female or male lead is ignored but even the idea or something that's percived as cheating is meet with kill bill sirens.

lol YEAH.

This is a controversial take, but.... I don't know. I think cheating is a very bad, sometimes horrific thing to do.

I don't think it is universally felt in the same way by all couples, and I find it really weird that the internet has kind of come to uphold it is as like... on the same level as assault, domestic violence in general. I also find it really weird that everyone seems to have taken this very simplistic "once a cheater, always a cheater" take to the extreeeeme.

I've never been cheated on, and I've never cheated on anyone. I have several close loved ones who've been cheated on. I supported someone through a cheating situation that really, really rocked her, with diminished confidence, panic attacks etc following (she's also... fine now and views the whole situation in a different light, which is another thing that can happen)--so I'm not diminishing how bad this can be. I also have been friends with someone who did do it, and moved past it and has a happy marriage now. I do not imagine that I could get past it... but who knows, I've also never been there.

However, I think this idea that every cheating scenario is this WELL-THOUGHT-OUT insidious affair that was designed to harm the other person and manipulate and abuse them is... flawed. Because let us be completely real. A lot of people cheat. A lot of people cheat once, and their partners literally never find out and they stay married and pretty happy for the rest of their lives, and nobody finds out. I know that's like, scary to consider, but it does happen.

So while I don't think it’s okay, I do think it's kind of ridiculous that we act like something as common as infidelity is always the same. Sometimes people are just really stupid, dude. Sometimes, people are really stupid and their partners get over it and it never happens again. Sometimes, people spin a web of life-altering lies with secret families that mentally destroy their partners upon discovery. Sometimes, a one-time stupid thing does destroy a relationship (and rightfully so).

I think that this really black and white perspective on cheating as like this UNIVERSALLY CATASTROPHIC EVENT is part of what makes people so averse to it in fiction. And like? Tbh? While it is REALLY difficult to pull off in a romance novel, I do think it's like... weird that something as complex and again, common in real life is like, anathema in romance. People can (and do) have their happily ever afters in their real life love stories after their partners cheat, or frankly after their partners cheat on their previous partners with them. It's not savory... But it's also not always a straightforward "this party is good, this party is bad" situation.

I will always say that the one thing I think romance NEEDS is the HEA and the prominence of the love story. Those are genre conventions. Otherwise... I don't know that there are hard and fast rules. It's kind of like the "can you write a romance in which one party has a terminal illness that is not resolved at the end" question. I don't know, dude. It's hard to pull off, but are we going to say that people don't have HEAs in these complex situations?

[mnemo-li]

Calebros: A Rant About My Favorite VTM NPC

I do love the newer Vampire: the Masquerade content, but sometimes the writing leaves a lot to be desired. A prominent example is - what in my opinion is - the butchery of Calebros’ character in Beckett's Jyhad Diary.

While I do love seeing the more brusque side of Calebros’ personality, I don’t think I’ve ever recalled him being this vulgar in the original Clan Novels. He was definitely not dropping the f-bombs left and right, and even his gruff manner had more to do with dry humor, sarcasm, and keeping up the dignified image fit for a clan leader. I do realize that this series of chat is set much after his whole ordeal as Prince of New York is over, so maybe the experience really changed him. However, the in-universe explanation of his drastic shift in personality is lacking– it is most likely the result of a change in writers which led to inconsistent writing and characterization.

Here are some examples of scenes that presents his characterization in a more nuanced light.

Scene 1: The Nictuku Accusation

“They would have eaten me, I tell you!” “I believe you, Jeremiah,” Calebros said in a forced, calm tone. He was tired of nodding politely, of reassuring his clanmate. Jeremiah could be a difficult person to like at times. This was rapidly becoming one of those times. “Don’t you humor me!” Jeremiah snapped. “I’ve been coming to you about this for weeks now.” Seems more like years, Calebros thought. “And still you’ve done nothing. Nothing!” Jeremiah paced around, gesticulating wildly. There was no second chair by Calebros’s desk, and for this very reason. He mostly didn’t like guests, didn’t want guests, didn’t want to encourage them to sit down, to take a load off and stay for a while. Most anyone who had reason or inclination to visit Calebros was irate, complaining, or tiresome. Jeremiah happened to be all three presently. “That is not true,” Calebros assured him. Jeremiah snorted in disgusted. “What, then? Tell me. What have you done?” “I have considered quite carefully your report.” “Ha! Like I said, nothing. ‘Considered my report…’” Jeremiah repeated contemptuously. “This is what I think of you and your reports—” he said, grabbing a handful of papers from the nearest stack on Calebros’s desk. Jeremiah made to fling them into the air— Instantly, Calebros’s hand shot out and latched around his visitor’s wrist. Talons pricked undead flesh ever so slightly. “Believe me,” said Calebros evenly. “You do not want to do that.” They faced each other for a moment, one monstrous creature restraining the hand of another. Jeremiah’s fingers, biting into the papers, were long and grotesquely thin, little more than needles of bone. His entire body was thin and hard and covered with knots, bulging masses of hardened tissue, like an old, gnarled swamp tree. Finally he stopped resisting Calebros and returned the reports to the desk. “I’m sorry,” Jeremiah said and resumed his pacing, just as intently if less frenetically.

This is from the Nosferatu clan novel. Here, Jeremiah is trying to get Calebros to believe that there truly are Nictukus dwelling in the sewers. Calebros is, frankly, tired of hearing the folk tale especially when he has other pressing matters to deal with. Yet, even with his patience paper thin, he does not lash out at his broodmate. He is shown to be deeply introverted, anti-social perhaps, but he does not let his own nature affect his duties. As the Nosferatu primogen - as the leader of the clan - he has to listen to the concerns of his family, no matter how absurd. He knows when to express his authority, and he never abuses it. Again, no f-bombs dropped.

Scene 2: The Salt Lake

“Geez, what am I, your mother?” Emmett asked. “No,” Calebros said. “You are my brother, my broodmate.” “Brood, litter, whatever. We were both chosen to suck the old blood tit, so who am I to ask questions?” Calebros sighed. Blood tit, indeed. “That’s not how you remember it.” Now it was Emmett’s turn to sigh. “Don’t do this. Don’t get all… You always do this, get all touchy-feely we’re-all-brothers-in-the-blood, when you soak your head, blah, blah, blah…” “Make light of it if you will—” “I will. Thank you very much. Got enough salt here?” Emmett flicked some at Calebros.

This is from the Nosferatu clan novel. Here, Calebros has just came up from his meditation within the mud hole / salt lake. He is shown to be introspective and even sentimental. In terms of character voice, his more poised speaking style and inner monologue is contrasted against Emmett’s rough, colloquial style.

Other Sources

In the Calebros graphic novel, a similar scene is shown where Calebros is depicted to be trying and failing to remember his past before he became a vampire, losing his mind as he mixes up imagination with false memories. His inner dialogue in the graphic novel shows him saying:

“Do I tell him that his prince, his... compatriot?, is losing his mind? Never.”

This very much reflects his true nature. In Vampire: the Masquerade, there is a system of nature vs demeanor. According to his character sheet, his demeanor is that of a “director” while his nature is a “martyr (penitent)”.

Director: To the Director, nothing is worse than chaos and disorder. The Director seeks to be in charge, adopting a "my way or the highway" attitude on matters of decision-making. The Director is more concerned with bringing order out of strife, however, and need not be truly "in control" of a group to guide it. Coaches, teachers, and many political figures exemplify the Director Archetype.

Martyr: The Martyr suffers for his cause, enduring his trials out of the belief that his discomfort will ultimately improve others' lot. Some Martyr simply want the attention or sympathy their ordeals engender, while others are sincere in their cause, greeting their opposition with unfaltering faith in their own beliefs. Many Inquisitors, staunch idealists, and outcasts are Martyr Archetypes.

Penitent: The Penitent exists to atone for the grave sin she commits simply by being who she is. Penitents have either low self-esteem or legitimate, traumatic past experiences, and feel compelled to "make up" for inflicting themselves upon the world. Penitent Archetypes aren't always religious in outlook; some truly want to scourge the world of the grief they bring to it. Repentant sinners, persons with low self-esteem, and remorseful criminals are examples of the Penitent Archetype.

All of these quotes, if feel, matches very much with the Calebros I knew from the clan novel saga. Below are also a set quotes detailing Calebros’ inner dialogue in his graphic novel.

“As prince, only I can save them, only I can keep them from looking where they shouldn’t. A force exists underneath this city, sleeping, and it must remain so, lest we all perish.

“Augustin, my sire, left us to investigate the Nictuku, and came back to me with this information. Could this be Gehenna? The Final Nights? When the Ancients awake to devour their errant children? Can it be stopped? Should it be stopped? Everything that is done is a hope of staving off the inevitable. Why?”

“My embrace into this world was a foregone conclusion, made for me by Augustin. It is no different for anyone else. Why then do we not welcome the coming Armageddon? Exchange one world for another. It sounds almost painless, except I would never accept such a course, neither would my fellow Nosferatu. Neither would my fellow Kindred, for that matter.”

He is incredibly contemplative, and determined too, willing to fight against the inevitable apocalypse of the vampires. As long as his clan and the Kindred as a whole does not give up, does not give in the the despair of Gehenna, he too will be willing to fight for the survival of others.

Scene 3: Against a Master Manipulator

The character of Hesha is... complex. I see him as sort of a sweet-talking, cunning, charismatic cult leader. Here is a dialogue between him and Calebros.

“No harm was done,” Hesha said softly, his voice still the slightest bit scratchy from the ordeal he’d undergone. “As you say,” said Calebros, not looking up and continuing to write furiously. “You concede without agreeing.” Hesha laughed quietly. Calebros’s head whipped up. Angry words were ready on his lips, but the Egyptian’s smile was not mocking. The Setite obviously realized the weakness of his position, physically and strategically, as well as the fragility of their alliance. “Candor is important between friends,” Hesha said. “Otherwise, perceived insults take hold and fester.” “I am quite accustomed to festering,” Calebros said curtly. “I fear that I’m growing so as well,” Hesha said, squeezing one of the boils that stood raised about one of his many open wounds until the canker popped, and frothy pus ran down his arm. He laughed quietly again. Calebros punctuated a written sentence with a particularly violent period. “Your woman willfully disobeyed her instructions.” “She exercised discretion,” Hesha countered. “She blatantly disregarded the safety of my people.” “If anything had gone wrong,” Hesha said, “it would be Pauline lying torn on the ground. Your people would have faded into the night, none the worse for wear.” Calebros fumed. Probably Hesha was correct—but the Nosferatu was not about to admit as much. “I will speak with her,” Hesha said reasonably. “She has not encountered those of your clan before. She’s not aware of how strongly your predilection for…” “Cowardice?” Calebros suggested accusingly. “Prudence, I was going to say. She’s not aware of how strongly your predilection for prudence runs.” Good choice of words, Calebros thought. But, then, Hesha always chose his words carefully, always seemed to know just the right thing to say. It was discomforting in a way, how easily the Setite could alleviate tension with just a few words. Go ahead, Eve. Take a bite of the apple. Adam might like some too. But it seemed that they needed one another—and that outweighed their natural and mutual tendencies to distrust one another. Just barely.

Hesha’s actions managed to get under Calebros’ nerves, as seen in his curt speech, his furious writing, his accusatory reply to Hesha. He is angry for the safety of his clan (which, as seen from all the other sources, is something very dear to him). He is even shown to be stubborn, refusing to admit that Hesha was correct. Even still, he keeps his head rather than loose his cool completely. He also realises Hesha’s smooth words for what they are- manipulation. He is willing to compromise and form a sort of alliance with Hesha too, despite of his distrust and personal feelings.

Calebros and Ramona

I found the strange friendship Calebros had with the Gangrel Ramona to be incredibly touching, and tragic due to the turns it took towards the end (which I won’t spoil). Below are some excerpts from the Nosferatu clan novel showing Ramona’s initial meeting with Calebros and his later assessments of her character.

Neither Pauline nor the other girl, Ramona, had been subjected to the full brunt of facing a Nosferatu. Not until now, that is, when they were brought into Calebros’s presence. He did not hide his true appearance from them. And he could read the dismay, the fear and disgust, on their faces. Of the two, Pauline made the worthier attempt, attempt, to maintain her demeanor of professional detachment—perhaps Ruhadze had taught her well. The Gangrel, unsurprisingly, was not so couth. She gawked, both at Calebros and at Hesha in his current condition, and she hid her revulsion quite poorly, if she tried at all. […] Ramona looked at Calebros again, a more measured look this time, trying to see through the deformities. Good girl, Calebros thought. Young and brash, but not stupid.

Ramona reached for a calendar on Calebros’s desk, but tossed it back when she realized it was from 1972. “That’s still a whole month, and nobody knows where Leopold was that whole time. He could have gone back to the cave.” Smart girl, Calebros thought. He was leading her along the same path of reconstructing events that he had followed.

He compliments her intelligence again and again, and seems genuinely fond of her. Which I believe is why, after he became Prince of New York, he allows her a private audience with him to which he offered her a safe passage out of town which she rejects, viewing his actions as a betrayal. Below is an excerpt from what I think is the Clan Brujah novel.

The hunched form stepped forward, leaning heavily against the seatbacks as he came. Ramona kept straining to pick out the sound of broken gasps that must accompany such labored progress, but the air did not stir. "You had requested an audience, my dear. A private audience. I have gone to some pains to secure a place where we might be alone. Privacy is such an indulgence here. All too often, I find myself unable to justify the expense of importing it. And there is always someone else jealous of such decadence. But you have not come to hear of my distractions. Sit here, next to me, and tell me why you have come.”

[…]

“Calebros chuckled low, a sound like an engine turning. "No, I don't imagine you would. I will miss your straightforward style, Ramona. I find it refreshing. But already you know that there is no longer any place for you here. In the midst of battle—against the Sabbat and later, against Leopold and the Eye—we could afford certain marriages of convenience. But these partnerships will not survive the challenges of peacetime. Your associates, Mr. Ruhadze and Mr. Ravana, they found themselves in much the same position. Each has already left New York.”

[…]

“Calebros was silent for a time, letting her wind down. "I'm sorry I couldn't help you with the Eye, Ramona. And I'm sorry you will have to leave us. Believe me, I would like nothing better than to find a place for you here. I will have sore need of people who can be relied upon in the nights ahead. But you know what you would be up against if you remained here— the posturing, the none-too-subtle snubbing, the outright backstabbing. You are a rarity among our kind, Ramona. But because you are different, you will be hated and eventually destroyed if you stay among the society of the damned. Know that I will remember our time together fondly. If I can be of any assistance to you in relocating..." "No, I understand. It's 'thanks for your help; here's your bus ticket.' Well, I don't need any of your favors. I don't like the strings attached to them. And I resent the fact that you think I'm so stupid that I'll let you screw me over and then thank you for it." "Ramona...”

Again, even during his tenure as Prince of New York he is so damn eloquent, I definitely can’t fathom the word fuck ever slipping out of his mouth. He is compassionate, helping Ramona perhaps for future gains too, but mainly I believe he genuinely wants to do something right, give her the happy ending she deserves for once.

Moreover, I have a soft spot for this quote of Calebros pondering about Ramona’s nature, why she’s always so angry at the world, why every word out of her mouth sounds like an accusation. It showcases well his world-weariness, a cynical attitude that hides his concerns for others.

What have you seen that makes you so angry, so bitter, little one? Calebros wondered. Family killed? Have you been betrayed? How many times, I wonder. You’d best get over it, if you hope to survive.

So... yeah. I’d pay money to see an accurate portrayal of Calebros in a newer media otherwise I might have to write my own fanfic pairing my OC with him

[37h4n0l]

Dear Tumblr, please learn how to be a bad person - a Rant(tm)

Let's get this out of the way; I'm not gonna tell you what 'good' and 'bad' are. My point is, in fact, that I have no authority to tell you. 

[rant under the cut]

Now, just so I can avoid making this entire rant about subjective morality - which I could discuss for ages, just not now - I'll bring up a point about it and then we'll be able to start from a common ground, at least. So, any kind of moral law is arbitrary for the simple reason that you cannot explain where it comes from (or, you could, to be precise, but doing so would only reveal how changeable it really is). There's an argument about tracing morality's origin back to biology, maybe the most convincing one out of all, but that's not the one an average person would use to explain their beliefs on what is right or wrong. Some would bring God into the picture, others would claim that they simply know because it's part of human nature and those who don't are just deviants or evil. It has me dumbfounded sometimes how little rigor we apply in our reasoning on something this basic. 'I simply know' is not an argument, and after a few more 'why?'s it all leads back to instincts of protecting our own species and other impulses overriding each other to different extents depending on the situation. This, however, completely defies the 'higher meaning' one would assume our moral values have and also makes them occasionally dismissible when they go against logic or long-time planning, in much the same way we do, for example, with hunger when we see someone else having a meal and resist the urge to violently try and snatch away whatever they are eating.

Now that we have established the foundation, let's see where it leads us and how we can discuss the concept of immorality in this context. Firstly and most importantly, these values having no logical basis and being mere instincts implies that what is 'right' or 'wrong' can vary significantly, which I'm sure no one would find shocking. But the step that follows is that there is no limit to how much these concepts can shift. Take any act you would find reprehensible - let's say, killing, just to make it simple - and now tell me which is worse between killing one person or killing five. By the usual reasoning of 'every human life is worth the same', we can assume that most people would say five. And there we go, killing one person is suddenly 'right' in the technical sense. Now you might roll your eyes at me and say that both options involved an immoral act, so obviously, committing said act multiple times is going to be 'more wrong'. What if you had to choose between one pregnant mother and five nazis? I'll say more; what about being convinced that the people you kill are going to Heaven and live an eternal, happy life there instead of this earthly existence full of suffering? A well-trained nitpicker will always be able to come up with a situation in which whatever you claim to be bad is not; a fun game to play, albeit tiring after some time. 

It follows naturally, that anything we do we think is a good act might happen to be considered bad by someone else. Yes, there are things that are statistically more likely to be seen as reprehensible, but those are, again, decided instinctively. The reverse might also be true; or, in general, any kind of act has a possibility of being perceived as either good or bad. What does being a 'bad person' mean then, after all of this? If we define it as someone who has committed a relatively large amount of 'bad' acts (or 'one big bad act'), then we have to remember how everything they did, which we classified as 'wrong', could potentially be considered good. Most of the time, in fact, the person committing such things thinks they are in the right. They might have enough awareness to see the problems others could have with their actions, but then again, 'the ends justify the means' comes very handy sometimes. Crimes and sins are nothing more than acts of egoism that hurt just the right amount of people; which is a vast generalization, as the reality of war would have us understand. Precisely because morality varies so much on a case-by-case basis, we keep overstepping our principles constantly, with or without realizing it. 

Human society has made an attempt at building up a common code of ethics out of convenience. It's not perfect, but it works most of the time. It's also easier to cram into people's heads by connecting it to morality (note that I don't use the terms 'morality' and 'ethics' interchangeably; the first one refers to the abstract principles, the second to the practice); after all, it feels better to abide by laws if it makes you think of yourself as a good person. In fact, many social interactions and expressed opinions are part of our striving to 'be good' or being seen as it. We could go as far as saying there's no difference between goodness and its appearance since no one will ever truly know our intent and the entire concept, in and of itself, relies on altruism and being in line with the unspoken rules of a presumed objective moral system. Humans can go incredibly far for the sole purpose of making a good impression, even far enough to bend the rules they are trying to adhere to in the first place. One principle compromises another, and this chaotic process - denominated as virtue signalling - comes crumbling down on itself if taken to the extreme, revealing it as what it's always been, at its core: yet another act of egoism. The need to 'be good' is no more noble or worthy than the need to eat, sleep or drink.

So why am I making a post about this on Tumblr, you may ask. What does this have to do with this website? A lot, actually. Tumblr is basically the haven of virtue signalling, even the site's structure and functionalities facilitate this. I doubt it was an intentional decision (after all, it did backfire on David Karp in the past, with people demonizing him as a 'cis white man'), but it turned out this way now and there's no going back. The way dashboard is built makes it easy to spread any kind of content very quickly, while a highly customizable personal blog gives the false impression of a private sphere, despite even the most intimate kind of content being searchable by keywords on the main page. It started attracting a type of person more prone to this competition in showing off who's more morally righteous, and it's been a vicious circle since then. 

The point I am trying to get to is that many people - especially here, on Tumblr - have become so obsessed with 'being good' that they fail to see how some of their actions to achieve this are vile and underhanded from others' point of view, enough to outweigh the help they offer to a community of their choice. With this comes a stubbornness that serves to justify whatever they do; 'they are doing this for the greater good, after all'. It's a strong as steel conviction to help them ignore their own aspects which could be considered 'bad' and keep living under the illusion that they can do no wrong and aren't hurting anyone. Yes, I'm talking about cutesy bloggers with pastel-coloured themes who participate in callouts and throw the harshest insults at whoever has a different view, dismissing any reaction to their behaviour as 'hate' or an exaggerated offense taken at their obviously perfect opinions. I'm talking about the teenagers (or sometimes people in their twenties) who consider targeted abuse 'sassy' and 'radical' just because their own kind bombards them with positive feedback for it in a fashion statement-style circlejerk, those who will call you a pedophile (an accusation potentially enough to ruin someone's career and social reputation) and get back to aesthetic blogging five minutes later with no qualms. 

There's a sort of moral perfectionism in the Tumblr mindset. Hell, it's there in everyday life, even, but it's more accentuated on this site. It's an expectation of always being righteous and unquestionable. No matter how repugnant a person's views are, they'll be looked down upon more for apologizing than not doing it - because an apology is, besides an exposed weakness, basically a warranty to be mistreated. Despite the alleged moral highground the niche radicals on Tumblr would want you to think they have, there's not an ounce of empathy in them for another human being when they perceive the person as an enemy. Show them that you're sorry and you regret disagreeing with them or attacking them, and they'll turn you into a punching bag within the span of minutes. Becoming a target is part of the deal for them, something you have to put up with if you haven't been on their side from the start. The justification? 'The rightful anger of the oppressed', or something like that. It never occurs to them that you're more than a demographic, that you're a person with thoughts and feelings just like them who's made a big compromise in their favour. 

This necessity for absolute purity is what makes the linch mob think it's right to pull out things someone said several years ago and use them against the person. Once you're tainted, it's forever; whatever you do, you won't wash it off. The only hope for redemption is starting a new account and denying links to the 'dark past'. Once someone starts with the assumption that they are part of the 'clean' ones, on the other hand, it becomes hard to convince them they have made mistakes. In this absence of self-awareness, the only thing that counts is the feedback; and as long as the majority is too afraid to contradict the justice blogger in question, they will proceed with their mistreatment of others. But does the guilt ever kick in? Well, yes, but there are easy ways to completely dismiss it, the most common being mental illness. You might have noticed that many Tumblr users are 'self-diagnosed' with even five or six psychological disorders (which - let's be real - if it were true would cause a massive impediment in everyday functioning). Whenever you do something you know is going to hurt another person, you can simply deny your agency in the situation and claim you're suffering more than them anyway because of your problems - two birds with one stone.

Perhaps the biggest problem with this behaviour - besides being massively damaging for the perpetuator's mental health itself - is the inability to accept being a bad person. Negative things are a part of life, as is acting in cruel and despicable ways from time to time. There is nobody so pure as to have never done something wrong; this is easy to see from what I've explained about the moral perception of actions at the beginning. And I'll dare to say that everyone has to have at least that small amount of self-awareness required to recognize this, even if subconsciously. But it appears that we live in a culture where it's now more fashionable to push these insecurities and regrets in the back of your mind and simply pretend that you've always been right, no matter how many mental gymnastics are required to prove it. Instead of letting people accept some actions as (even a 'necessary') bad, the Tumblr subculture encourages you to instead see them as good deeds. It seems like an insignificant distinction, but trust me, it changes the common mindset radically. And here I share some advice based on both firsthand and secondhand personal experience, as well as extrapolations from what I've said above.

1) This is an extremely common talking point and it has popped up in numerous controversies regarding the Tumblr-mindset; do not apologize. Again, you achieve nothing with this, except for giving up your own dignity. You don't have to compromise with people who are deliberately attacking you, and turning it into a civil debate - something I have personally tried to do multiple times - is impossible. These people don't and will never see you as a friend or even a neutral entity. They're there to bring you down and they will abuse of every opportunity to do so. Stand up for yourself, don't crawl back. If you do, you're feeding the same mentality they have succumbed to by trying to show them that you really are a good person, something they will never believe. 

2) It's alright to be 'bad'. Firstly, because morality is subjective, but that's besides the point. Everyone has acted in immoral ways at least once and we all know it; hiding it is futile and disingenuous. Don't be afraid to lose friends or ruin your public image, because, believe me, everyone has the same problem. No one is pure. Do what you want to do and spend time with people who accept it - those who don't are not worth your time. But own up to it. Admit it. Come to terms with the fact that it's part of your personality. 

3) 'Don't sink to their levels' is good advice in some situations, but not all of them. You're not ascending to a higher ground by becoming a martyr and a victim. I could go into an entire rant about how we're still suffering the subtle influences of Christian morality despite not being in a situation where it's suitable and adequate - it started out as a coping mentality for a persecuted sect, which Tumblr users definitely aren't - but the main point is that you don't have to turn the other cheek. Someone is setting up an entire group of people to go after you? Who's going to blame you if you do the same right back at them? Don't police yourself if the other side refuses to. 

Ultimately, we're all horrible, corrupt, petty and hateful - in some circumstances and from certain points of view. If someone says they're not... Well, they're lying. Don't let the perfectionism ruin you; it's nothing but a tool for other people to vent their frustration on you and feel more righteous. Do your good things, do your bad things, know them for what they are and let others do the same. I hope this came through.