#like they still murder people for no good reason but they are... more nuanced than they originally were still LOL

[drawnecromancy]

Author ask game

Tagged by @isabellebissonrouthier ! thanks :)

Tagging : @the-stray-storyteller, open tag bc idk who else would like to be tagged ^^

I'll be talking about Le Prix du Sang here.

1) What is the main lesson of your story (e.g. kindness, diversity, anti-war), and why did you choose it?

There isn't any that I'm currently planning on having. Whether I'll find one on the way or not is still up for debate. I'm not giving lessons, I'm just throwing awful people in the same general area and looking at what they do.

2) What did you use as inspiration for your worldbuilding (like real-life cultures, animals, famous media, websites, etc.)?

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh [blanking]

There's definitely the. General european fantasy setting you'd expect from a european writer, i guess.

Although this place's worldbuilding is, specifically, based on a no-fun-allowed discussion I've had with my sister AGES ago when I was a teenager. What if it had magic, but was an awful fucking place ?

Idk. I tend to pick inspiration from a lot of places and it's hard for me to pinpoint one thing exactly. I can tell you when rereading that "ah, i probably picked that bit up from Ewilan" or "oh, this is absolutely because I hated X thing in les Chevaliers d'Emeraude", or even "oh okay this whole dye business is absolutely because of some of the classes i had".

Definitely, the fact that Monthaut is known for its high quality wool fabric is because of my classes.

3) What is your MC trying to achieve, and what are you, the writer, trying to achieve with them? Do you want to inspire others, teach forgiveness, help readers grow as a person?

She's trying to achieve having a stable life for once, and once she gets at she's trying to keep it no matter what it takes.

I'm trying to see how interesting I can make that while sometimes the secondary characters are doing most of the stuff.

I want readers to come watch those fucked up little guys with me. Again. I'm not going to teach you SHIT. Come look at my weirdoes. They're kind of awful. Wanna see how far they can take their bullshit ?

4) How many chapters is your story going to have?

I have no idea ! Several, definitely ! I've written, uh, 8 of them so far. We're not past the halfway point. So at least double that ?

5) Is it fanfiction or original content? Where do you plan to post it?

Original content. I don't plan on posting it, but on hopefully going the traditional publishing route.

6) When and why did you start writing?

Good question ! A long time ago is the best i can do.

I do think I used to write random snippets when i was a very young kid, just for fun, to entertain myself. Then it was writing stories with my younger sister, just for the both of us.

We'd always find ways to put links to each other's stuff in our writings. Were our main characters actually related ? Did they just know each other for whatever reason ? Etc.

7) Do you have any words of engagement for fellow writers of Writeblr? What other writers of Tumblr do you follow?

Uhh... I consider myself to be a little bit to the left from writeblr because this is just my personal blog, man. I just happen to be a writer and an artist.

A lot of my friends tend to be these things too, altho I'm not super sure they'd consider themselves part of writeblr (hi Mal my beloved, Jo, Zach!, Alren); so I'm not tagging them here. Again, don't know if that'd bother them.

For people who have writeblrs that I follow, well, there's Isabelle and Stray I've already tagged, and @holdmyteaplease (also, if you do want to do this tag game, feel free!i just don't know if you do tag games LMFAO); and I think that's about it.

[obsidianstrawberrymilk]

Anyways I'm bored BSD no nuance hot takes

Yosano could probably beat pretty much everyone in the series with the exception of Fukuchi bc. Y'know

Dazai's not that hard of a character to understand if you've had depression from a relatively young age

Chuuya's not an alcoholic

He is gonna have heart problems when he gets older though

Kyouka's mischaracterization is so blatant in fandom but basically never bought up

Naomi and Junichiro have relatively equal amounts of focused screentime and development and in fact Naomi shows more initiative separate from Junichiro than he does from her

Also the theory she's a manifestation of his Ability has already been disproven

idk if this is even a hot take. Mori's not a predator. It's annoying and inaccurate and also boring as fuck to insist he is.

People write Ranpo too nice. Ya'll he's an asshole let him act like one.

Any problems people have with how Kunikida 'treats' Dazai are the same as how Chuuya treats Dazai and there's like zero argument there

Dazai wouldn't self harm

Atsushi's a great main character, one of the most interesting in the series, and does his damn job AS the main character

Chuuya's a good character, yes. There are also other fucking characters in this damn series than him and Dazai

Oda and Dazai pedestalized one another; this wasn't a healthy dynamic. However Oda really did understand Dazai in the end of Dark Era and WAS the reason Dazai was able to better himself and move away from a path that was gonna kill him and was one of the only people who could have convinced him to better himself.

The ADA-PM trade isn't gonna happen

Kunikida is both a well developed and fascinating character who's behaviors stem from stress, trauma, and likely high functioning mental illness, and is not as predictable as fandom makes him out to be

Also this isn't even a hot take but neither he nor Teruko are perma dead

Akutagawa did in fact Do That Shit. He did in fact Think That Way. He's having development but he does still believe the weak deserve to die and is only now learning not to have his instinctive reaction be murder. Like he can do what he wants but the fact his development is so good is undercut if you ignore how he started.

Also the PM is like. Not a good place? For anyone? Like the characters are sympathetic and we've been made aware of the complexities surrounding how it benefits the city but also as an organization and structure it's not at all healthy and BSD is. Pretty clear about that.

This fandom is like definition of "why are you going for moral simplicity in the nuance store" or however that post goes credit to the postmaker

[moonyasnow]

Just some Octatrio thoughts, about another post

Ok I don't usually do this but this one take about the Octatrio I scrolled past on my dash the other day has invaded my brain like a parasite and latched on and absolutely refuses to let go, so I just need to get it out of my system or it's gonna drive me crazy

I don't remember the OP's name, but if I remember correctly the post was basically about how, apparently(apologies in advance if I got something wrong or misrepresented the OP's words):

People who have soft, fluffy headcanons for Azul, Jade and Floyd are kids who had the jokes the characters were based on, such as:

Jade likes mountains apparently not because he just thinks nature is fascinating but it's supposed to be a joke for mountains being good places to dump bodies

The Leeches are implied to be a literal fish mafia

The Octatrio are dressed like American prohibition-era mobsters

Jade and Floyd want to eat Azul

fly over their heads.

And I just—

The only word I can think of to explain what I feel every time I remember it is 'baffled'. I mean absolutely 0 disrespect in any way, shape or form to the OP, but I am genuinely fascinated by how they could have come to those conclusions.

My first thought was 'no actually I'm pretty sure people get it' And there are people over the age of 18 who have fluffy headcanons about them too, you know?

My second is 'why can't it be both?' Like, why can't Jade genuinely find mountains and nature fascinating while having it on a more meta level also be a small joke about how mountains are good places for dumping bodies?

Why can't Floyd like Takoyaki while also NOT wanting to eat his best friend?

Why can't the Leeches be a mafia family while still having Jade and Floyd, who are literally still teenagers, be multidimensional characters who have priorities and like other things than just 'haha murder'?

Sure, those jokes and influences are there, but they are not the end-all-be-all of the characters? This just feels like a very one-dimensional way of looking at these characters.

And isn't TWST's entire thing that appearances can be deceiving? In a way I feel like Jade's love of mountains being viewed as 'oh he dumps bodies there because he's a scary ocean monster and has thus probably killed people before so of course that's why' is a very surface-level reading and understanding of him as a character— it just sounds like something some random student who has only seen him from afar and doesn't actually know him as a person would think.

And it's a similar thing with the Takoyaki. The surface-level reading would be 'if he likes eating Takoyaki, which has octopus in it, that must mean he wants to eat Azul too! Because Floyd is big and scary and has probably killed people before' To me it also sounds like something Ace or Grim might think before Book 3.

And, while I'm not gonna deny the Tweels have almost certainly murdered (or at least gotten close to it) people before, in a way it just feels kinda...idk, mean-spirited? To say, for example, that Jade can't just have nature be a thing he enjoys for its own merits, that he's not allowed to have that as just a thing he genuinely likes and there has to be some deeper, meta reason for why. Or that Floyd can't just enjoy Takoyaki and probably tease Azul with it but also not actually want to eat him because he likes him and wants him around. To me that kinda feels like sucking all the joy and interesting nuance out of a character, in a way.

And implying that the people who don't ascribe to the same view as you are kids also feels somewhat infantilizing? Like, it just comes off as saying that the people who disagree haven't thought about it hard enough or just aren't smart enough to get it, and I just feel like that's not a great stance to take in any kind of discussion. Quite a flimsy way of trying to discredit the opinions of those who disagree, too.

I am NOT trying to start any kind of 'drama' or 'attack OP' or anything like that; I'm genuinely very confused— I just feel like one of us, either OP or me, is misunderstanding something here

[nekropsii]

“Bad Representation” is actually a topic I’m really passionate about and interested in, I could talk about it for ages. The way people handle “Bad Representation” as a concept is genuinely fascinating, too, so this is both an analytical fascination and an anthropological one.

For clarity, I thoroughly do believe there is such thing as “Bad Representation”, especially when it comes to expressions of pure bigotry from the person doing the representing… But I personally think everyone’s bar for what counts as “Bad Representation” is set a little bit too strictly, has no real account for capitalistic and/or historical restrictions - For Example: Language and common understanding of queer identity being far different in the 1950’s than it is now, and Studio Meddling - and also, interestingly, tends to take no account for the opinion of those getting “represented”, or the idea of individual satisfaction.

There’s been many, many times where a character is objectively pretty bad representation by modern standards, but discussion surrounding it takes no account for the concept of Resonance. Sometimes a character is not “Good Representation” as an objective concept, but they are relatable, likable, and quite fun to watch. I’ve seen quite a few instances of people talking down to the mentally ill or disabled for enjoying a Slasher in part because of their disorder/disability, or queer people for enjoying Hays Code villains. Sometimes a character isn’t written kindly, or isn’t written well, but they really resonate with you… And that counts for something.

One of my favorite characters - one who has helped me come to terms with my cPTSD and OSDD - is a representation of PTSD + DID that is objectively not very good. He’s basically a Vietnam War veteran, who gets an Alter in the middle of the war that is basically a self defensive Murder Mode. It’s literally the PTSD from The War and Evil Alter cliche, but there’s just some aspects that really hit for me, like the fact that he’s considered the nicest, kindest person in the cast, and the alter is portrayed clearly as being in constant self defense mode, thinking he’s still in the middle of the war, and also being quite silly. There’s several details I view as being done pretty well, a whole arc about him grappling with his mental health in a way I find quite fascinating and visceral, and I enjoy him quite a lot! But many would agree that he’s “Bad Representation” because of the War PTSD and Evil Alter tropes. Even I agree that those things kinda suck, but that’s not stopping the fact that this character has meant a lot to me, and that I really would not be the same level of okay with myself if I hadn’t discovered this character.

I’ve caught flack for this. I’ve seen many other people latch onto a character who is not executed very well because they find them personally relatable, or are using them to figure some things out about themselves, and also catch flack for it because the character is not “Good Representation” for a group as a whole. No account for Resonance, no account for Individual Experience. It’s a fascinating lack of a sense of nuance.

I think people have forgotten - or perhaps do not realize - that criticizing a base concept, or base execution of a concept, is different from criticizing individual experience. It’s like the difference between criticizing the makeup industry vs. criticizing someone’s personal choice to wear makeup. It is good to point out when something is written or executed poorly, but you do not know the reason why that one individual disabled person enjoys a poorly written character who shares their disability. I would even say that they probably know more than you do that it’s written badly, because they have lived that character’s disability and you likely have not. I think you should maybe step off if a blind person really likes Terezi or something. You do not need to patronize them by telling them that she isn’t “Good Representation” because her quirk isn’t screenreader friendly, and that her blindness has a magical workaround. I think they already know that these are facts about her that are true. They like her for a reason, and that reason is Resonance.

[naazaif327]

It’s so strange to me seeing people bend over backwards to try claiming that there’s absolutely no connection between TLOU2’s setting and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Like, I absolutely love The Last Of Us from the bottom of my heart, those games and characters will stay with me for the rest of my life, but also it’s just like so clear from any angle that Seattle’s war between the Seraphites and the WLF is just Druckmann’s “progressive liberal” zionist view of the irl occupation.

Like, on the one hand you’ve got the WLF (IDF/Israel), who are clearly criticized as being overly militarized and doing a bit too much torture and dehumanization, but they’re also super diverse and queer-friendly, and they’re very accepting of various different faiths and religions while still being overall pretty secular (this isn’t just me speculating btw, as you pass by you’ll listen to various WLF npcs openly talking about their faith and sexuality). They’ve got a fucked up leadership/governance under their angry ruler Isaac, but they’re good people as individuals, they’re just caught up in a cycle of revenge/violence. They’re mostly made up of people who were oppressed (by FEDRA) before staging an uprising and revolting to take back their land, which they lovingly cultivate and make use of innovative modern technology to make their world better. It’s a perfect metaphor for Israel to a Zionist who truly thinks that he has a nuanced view of a country he loves.

And then you’ve got the Seraphites (Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims), an angry backwards religious cult that hates progress and queerness and religious freedom, it’s members all brainwashed and worshipping a powerful prophet who proved her worth by performing miracles to win military victories for the cause. All of their children either become child soldiers or child brides for the elders. They hate using technology or anything from the modern world, their backwards culture holds them back and makes them socially/militarily weak. They enact violent lynchings against any poor WLF soldier that crosses their path. Besides Lev and Yara, they are a monolith, a people who exist as violent enemies to slaughter or as brainwashed masses to be pitied as they are massacred. Again, a perfect metaphor for both Islam and Palestinians to a man who has only ever seen both groups through the eyes of Israeli propaganda.

Notably, there is of course no apartheid, no checkpoints, no forced migration by one group or another in the history of the conflict (which we slowly learn through notes and diaries and letters scattered throughout the game). The WLF did not slaughter Seraphites in order to steal their homes, did not take their land and murder their families, nor did they force the Seraphites into concentration camps. The WLF has not been policing the Seraphites’ crops, has not been seizing their funds or resources, or poisoning their wells. The Seraphites aren’t trying to reclaim their stolen land or get the boot of the WLF off their neck. There is no actual ongoing reason for the war, the only reason the Seraphites are still fighting is to “get vengeance” and “kill the degenerate Wolves” rather than to live freely, because Druckmann sees this as the root of the Palestinian cause. To him, Palestinians are not fighting because they’re oppressed by Israel but because they hate Israeli culture and Judaism, and because they can’t just let bygones be bygones (the “bygones” in this case being ethnic cleansing). To him, Israel isn’t oppressing Palestinians and profiting off their suffering, Israel is just fighting back against antisemitism and maybe going too far to protect itself.

In the game, both sides were hurt by FEDRA, and then after the WLF defeated FEDRA, the Seraphites randomly pushed into the suburbs to terrorize the citizens there, causing them to rush to join the WLF. From then on both sides in tandem kept attacking and thus escalating conflicts into more and more violence. There is no oppression, no power differential, one side is not living in the forcibly abandoned houses of the other. There is no reason for conflict, only the meaningless violence that would immediately end if we could all just get along and stop trading completely equal blows.

The conflict ends on an uncertain note that nauseatingly mirrors the current reality. After escalating conflicts, the WLF launches a violent all-out attack on the largest Seraphite base, their island, wiping out most of the Seraphites, razing their fields and crops, slaughtering their children, and burning down almost everything the Seraphites spent decades building. The WLF in turn have lost much of their military force, but their homes and their children seem blissfully unharmed at the end of this. The future is uncertain, but it seems that the WLF/IOF is the “winner”. And it’s all very tragic to Druckmann of course, the dead Scars/Arabs are a very sad thing that could have been avoided if everyone just listened and relaxed. Material oppression doesn’t matter, and this could all just be solved by having integrated schools or whatever.

[tessarionbestgirl]

“Softening the main Targ because people “love” them” is just history revisionism unless anon somehow means Jon. Dany is wayyy more aggressive and cold in the show. Her ending was planned early, so this makes sense for the show to do this bc book Dany can’t even kill hostages much less nuke a surrendered city. It almost feels like Ryan is adapting book Dany which is bizarre bc she and book Rhaenyra are about as different as you can get!

Yes, I think D&D took Jon nuances and made him a generic prototype hero. In the book he is so much more strategic than the short temper guy he is in the show, I hate the battle of the bastards and that whole arc because nothing show!Jon does after his death fits in his book version, their fanfic was always there, It Just got progressively worse when they didn't have material to adapt. I pretty sure when Jon comes back from the dead he is not going to look the same. Death always takes away something from people in asoiaf.

And in part agree to the whole Dany thing, they made her since s1, more cruel and military focused than she was in the books and taking away her connection with magic took essential part of her character and her arc. In that sense, yes, they adapted part of Dany's arc into Rhaenyra, but It does not fully works. Because both characters are supposedly care about "prophecy" and the weight of the family legacy, but Rhaenyra behavior through the first season does not reflect this. Furthermore, the arc that Rhaenyra is supposed to be copying in this season is Dany's in the book A Dance with Dragons.

Whatever the claims are completely different, because Dany is fighting against oppression and slavery and Rhaenyra is fighting for her to be queen. Thematically, ironically, Alicent is the one who borrows the most from Dany in the show. Her young version arc is a westerosi version of what Dany goes though in book one, her marriages are very much alike as well. Even the Idea of she, narratively, to be more than the mother of the one who should be "the king/The stallion who mounts the world" is present in the show.

But It does not fully works and is bizarre and disconnected because those characters are never originally thought out to be the same and neither Ryan or Sarah, despite understanding certain themes they are unable to recreate because they are not as talented as writers as Martin is. Rhaenyra is a character to be a Cersei's reflection and hint at Cersei future conflic and endgame.Alicent is her own character but being a mother still essential part of who she is and her motivation, taking that and make her sacrifice her only child is insane character murder because It took the motivation she was build up into It, It takes her character foundation. I have no idea what her story moving up because lmao what even is the story after that "queen in chains"? Just after they ended her finally reaching her "freedom".

Daenerys presence on a Dance of the Dragons, It should only happens as a hidden subject, though the prophecy. Same as Jon with the Gregan And Jace pack, that they cut out for no good reason what só ever.

And the Aegon's prophecy I truly I believe it is something real, It already play a part on Dany dreams and because Martin himself said will play a part on future events so is confimed as true and canon.

GRRM: In some sense he[Aegon the Conqueror] saw what was coming 300 years later, and wanted to unify the Seven Kingdoms to be better prepared for the threat that he eventually saw coming in the north."Daenerys Targaryen is no maid, however. She is the widow of a Dothraki khal, a mother of dragons and sacker of cities, Aegon the Conqueror with teats." ADWD

Whatever I am not as sure in the book canon Viserys even know the prophecy. I think It died with Jaehaerys, and I have a strong theory of why he didn't pass that information, but, this post is to long already. I believe neither Aegon nor Rhaenyra knew about it.

The Daemon part is acually the one I believe, I stugled a lot about how this arc ended, but after analyzing and digesting, I think it makes a lot of sense for him to suport Rhaenyra after he come to sort religious experience, because is not for her, It is because he new view on the events, and that makes sense.

Either way, Sorry for my Ted talk anon, AMD thanks for sending a ask.

[gabrielsbubblegumbitch]

do you have any opinions on the hazbin critical and vivziepop critical tags?

tw // mentions of sexual abuse and sucide

I have a personal beef with them. And not because I love Hazbin and Vivzie so much but for more presonal reasons so the following opinion won't be measured at all.

Now, don't get me wrong, there are some legit criticisms out there. Like, the show could definitely do better with body diversity and giving us more varied sapphic relationships instead of just throwing a ton of male/male couples at us. And, yeah, Vivzie's response to some of the criticism has been... questionable. (I still cringe when I think about that one time she explained that Raphielle can ship ValAngel because they are sa survivor, but Raphielle explicitly admitted to not be one).

But then, there's stuff that's just... pulled out of nowhere. Like the whole thing about Valentino being a "fetish character." Come on, the world of villains is filled with queer, flamboyant baddies. What sets Valentino apart is how his abusive behavior is shown in the open, making us rethink our love for villains. If it weren't for Mascarade, people would worship this moth daddy gangster in a dress, much like they are with Vox now. It's hard to root for the bad guy when you see the fallout of their actions. Like, Loki committed war crimes and no one was outraged when he got his own TV series and dragged creators for supporting atrocities.

Constant Valentino/Angel Dust discourse actually leads to the more serious issues I have with this "community", more harmful than just "bad media literacy" like the way they handle the topic of sexual abuse and weaponize it, without ever listening to victims. There is this constant shitstorm about Angel being a "bad sa survivor rep," that the way he's written is insensitive because "he shouldn't be horny, he's sexually traumatized." Like, do these people not understand that making Angel unable to enjoy his sexuality the way he wants would essentially mean acknowledging that it's no longer his but belongs to his abuser now? Also, the argument I keep seeing that drives me BAT SHIT CRAZY aka "I can enjoy this media that is centered around murderer, you cannot enjoy the media that treats rapist as a nuanced character because rape is objectively worse than murder." WHO THE FUCK TOLD YOU THAT? Reading this makes me feel so angry and sad and guilty because frankly, I was raped, and of course, it was horrible but still I'd choose it any time over being murdered. Because I have my life, I'm loved, and I love, I pursue my dreams, and I can still experience so many good things in my life. Painting sexual assault as this worse-than-death experience is not the feminist take they think it is and does not do victims any good.

Or accusations that Vivzie's support of fandom bullying led to someone taking their life. It's such a ridiculous and harmful claim. Honestly, this thing always makes me heated because suicide is not an easy decision, ask any person who ever faced it. It's not like "ah, this stranger told me to kms, I guess I gotta do it now." Of course, any kind of bullying and abuse adds to the suffering and can be the final trigger, but to me, it's just so disrespectful and harmful that someone could have experienced prolonged, intense suffering and all of this is omitted, their death labeled as a result of "fandom bullying" and weaponized in fandom drama. Also, it's simply cruel to put the blame for it on one, uninvolved person.

Also, it always annoys me when people hold small creators to immensely high standards while not doing the same with others. If we keep lynching and canceling every media that is not objectively morally pure, we won't be left with only perfect media. We will be left with media produced by white, privileged billionaires who might be real-life rapists, abusers, and thieves but are too powerful to be taken down by social media outrage. Hazbin's success is a major W for the underappreciated medium of animation (we saw what WB did to 90% of their animated shows), unpopular genres like musicals (Wonka creators were literally too ashamed to market it as one??), and unapologetic queer narratives that are not written for a heteronormative audience or centered around queer oppression (ofmd, the other medium I can think of in that realm has just been canceled). I can't stand people so desperate to put it down driven by their black-or-white sense of morality. Kant won't be patting your back for being the Moraliest Person because you bullied an indie creator and her fans.

Also everyone who feels the need to explain me hazbin critical agenda - save your breath. I'm very emotional about it and I frankly don't fucking care why you think you are right.

[bioethicists]

Genuine question, but is restorative/ transformative justice useful for addressing hate groups?

I was under the impression that the prevention of violence extended to hate groups, but I keep seeing the reoccurring message from some people that incels, for example, don't need compassion or community (reasoning being, that they became incels because of their entitlement and superiority complex, which would not be solved with accountable compassion or community).

But I don't really understand the unspoken alternative? It seems so much worse for the women they'll inevitably interact with to just leave them isolated in their community, edging each other to the extreme.

while i do think some people online genuinely believe that incels are like, broken sociopathic monsters who need to be murdered or abandoned by society because it's their own fault etc, i think most of the time what people mean by that is "the burden of teaching men not to hate women should not be on women; men are still responsible for their own hateful actions; they are not owed my compassion or empathy, even if it would 'help' them". it's also backlash to the fact that people like incels often get painted as poor little victims in a way many other people (like the women they hate so much) do not.

that being said, everything that happens to anyone ever happens in community, whether people like it or not. total individualism is fake + any leftist worth their salt knows this. if the only way you can imagine someone having accountability for their actions is to believe that something is entirely, 100% their fault with absolutely no outside influences or nuance, then nobody can never be held accountable for anything. everyone needs compassion + community (i would argue the benefit many ppl derive from hate group membership is a sense of community), but i wouldn't say they are owed it by any individual. i would also say that the way in which compassion/community is applied (often when there is no political analysis + it's just based on appeals to "everyone has good inside them" or "love away the hate") in these cases can become just a way of reinforcing an echo chamber, refusing to challenge someone's beliefs, or silencing the people harmed (critiquing ppl for not being "good" victims or not having compassion for their abusers).

ppl often misunderstand restorative approaches as being "lesser" or "letting people off" when they can often require more accountability + more demonstration of change than a carceral approach. it is not synonymous with "loving someone's hate" or "letting them off easy". i mean, under the u.s carceral system, membership in most hate groups is not illegal. even when it becomes legally relevant, the people who are actually harmed are rarely centered in these approaches- it's just a bloodfest over how much we can punish people so we can show off how we think misogyny is super bad even as the court system continues to be one of, if not the most prolific perpetrator of misogyny + victim blaming. as if a handful of violent misogynists' suffering is supposed to be vindication or deterrence (when it never rlly is).

ultimately, there are tens of thousands of reasons why someone may be a member of a hate group, but it usually boils down to the fact that they are deriving some sort of benefit- financial, emotional, familial, cultural, interpersonal, etc- for doing so. some people would probably respond really well to a restorative approach because they would be capable + interested in delving into why they believe these things + how they could get their needs met without harming others. others are fully aware of the fact that they are deriving benefit at the expense of others + simply do not care or, worse, that is the benefit for them- the hurting other people/feeling superior to others. part of moving outside of the logic of the carceral system is moving past the idea that every individual person must be either punished or saved, rather than focusing on the conditions which create hate groups + give them power.

there may be a lot of individual members of hate groups who would not benefit from restorative practices, but we can still make hate group membership as undesirable + lacking benefit as possible, minimize the amount of power + resources they have to do harm, magnify the amount of power + resources the people they are harming have access to. to me, this is restorative, because it focuses on minimizing harm rather than punishing perpetrators + centers around people who have been harmed. further, if we understand the needs or desires that often drive hate group membership, we can work to make those needs/desires easier to fulfill through less destructive means + do the structural work of addressing why, for example, so many teenage boys have a need/desire to feel sexually dominant or 'alpha'.

the biggest restorative work to me is not based on any one individual, but on making the pathways into hate groups as narrow as possible + the pathways out as broad as possible, while still emphasizing accountability + capacity for change.

[musicalmoritz]

do u hc any character on the aro/ace spectrum?

I love this question!! Unfortunately since TBHK is so heavily focused on romance, I don’t have many. Ofc aroace ppl can still date but fandoms tend to ignore the nuance of that statement and put them into relationships without considering what that means for them. I like to look at it a bit deeper because aroace headcanons do have some importance to me. My sister is aroace so every time I see a headcanon for a character being aspec I have to let her know lol. So before I get into this list I just wanted to say to any aroace ppl who see this, I love ya’ll, ya’ll are doing great <3

Nobody murder me, I’m going to explain. Typically I’m not a fan of aroace villains bcuz the trope has some nasty implications. That doesn’t mean no villain character can ever be headcanoned as aroace but I need some very good reasons before sticking with a headcanon like that. And for Tsukasa, I have my reasons!! A lot of fans tend to agree that he shouldn’t be in a relationship with anybody and that used to really annoy me because I don’t like the whole “this character is clearly mentally ill therefore they get no love” thing. I know it goes deeper than that with him being generally abusive but still. Eh. There are people with disorders that make them bad partners and those people are still very capable of getting therapy and improving. Plus most fans who say that claim to love toxic ships to like???

I’m not really a fan of any Tsukasa ships tho (I used to crack ship TsuAoi but those days are over) so I figured I would actually put some effort into giving a reason as to why he doesn’t do relationships. Rather than go the whole “he could hurt other people” route, I wanted to focus more about how Tsukasa himself would feel about dating. And to be honest? I don’t think he’d like it! He’s definitely interested in relationships as a concept but I don’t think he’s the type to take them seriously. I try to use this headcanon to humanize Tsukasa rather than demonizing him like a lot of people do with aroace villain headcanons. Love is very important to him on a platonic level but romance just isn’t his thing. And it creates a nice contrast in fics between him and characters whose lives center so much around romance. My sister actually is the one who introduced me to this hc and every aroace hc she has is law so I abide by it lmao

This one is way more recent but it makes so much sense to me. If you want to talk about characters who are more realistically potentially aroace, Tsuchigomori has never expressed the desire for a love interest in canon. When most adult male characters are single in fiction it’s seen as a problem (at least in a comedic sense), but with Tsuchigomori none of the characters question it. I feel like he has some level of interest in romance, maybe demiromantic?? But overall romantic attraction isn’t something he experiences easily

This one is more based on vibes and me hunting down every TBHK character that doesn’t have an arc connected to romantic attraction. I don’t think he realized it when he was alive because the people in his village didn’t talk about asexuality/aromanticism much. Maybe he thought he was gay but that didn’t quite feel right because his disinterest in women extended to everyone. He seems like the type to love being surrounded by people and be generally very personable, so his platonic relationships are very important to him. Just no romance

I know you specifically asked for aroace characters but I 100% see this man as demiromantic, and maybe demisexual too. Possibly completely asexual, though leaning more towards the positive side of the spectrum (or just neutral). Emotions don’t come easily to this man so love is a complicated subject but I do believe he’s capable of loving people romantically, just under specific circumstances and not in the traditional sense

I hope you liked these headcanons!! I’ve seen some others that interest me too. I once wrote a Sakuhiko request where they were both aroace and queer platonic, that was very fun. I’ve also seen both the Minamoto brothers written as asexual which is cool to me. Tbh I’m open to most types of headcanons unless I see one that inexplicably gives me the ick…but even then I mind my business bcuz I don’t have to agree with every headcanon I see. I may not have many aroace headcanons for TBHK but I have more for other fandoms, completely unrelated but I could write a whole essay on why Jean Valjean is aroace lol

[sailorblossoms-snowbaz]

On Baz and unconditional love

Baz has a better understanding of love because, unlike Simon, he grew up being loved. But you can see something in Baz's responses to Simon's reaction every time the kidnapping incident is brought up: Baz doesn’t know what to do when he receives unconditional, unapologetic love. One that, when dealing with arguably the most traumatic moment of Baz’s life, doesn’t avoid vulnerability, doesn’t chastise him for “letting it happen” because “he’s a Pitch, he should be stronger than that” or awkwardly offers therapy but lets it all go like it never happened when Baz doesn’t take the offer on the first try.   

Baz has experience feeling unconditional love, but I don’t think he has much experience receiving it, perhaps to the point he doesn’t even expect it... Which doesn’t mean his family doesn’t genuinely love him, but he doesn’t perceive their love like it comes with no “buts” (and the adults are pretty bad at expressing it). All of them had made him feel small, shamed, and otherized in one way or another, like there wouldn’t be a place for him if he were to be himself and not conform to their wishes and expectations. It says so much that he wonders whether his dead mom, who he only remembers as loving him, would want him dead if she knew who he was. While Daphne seems to generally make his life easier, she’s not without fault (says much that Baz doesn’t know whether she means “the gay thing” or the “vampire thing” when speaking about being cured iirc, and his surprise when she wants to invite his “friend” Simon) and seems like a weaker figure. (Baz’s nuanced understanding of said adults screams of “child forced to grow up and mature too fast.”) 

When Simon says things like “I’d found you sooner, sparring you pain,” and “I’d slaughter anyone who hurts you” Baz doesn’t know how to react. He can’t believe it, and he tries to deny/downplay it with “nah you hated me then, what are you talking about.” Even after he has seen Simon go nuclear and kill because he was being sexually harassed, after having had this conversation with Simon in his house and already hearing Simon saying he would’ve saved him then, and after already hearing Simon says he loves him: Baz still “jokes” that Simon would’ve “just sent them a thank-you card, actually.” This upsets Simon, and with good reason: it’s fucked up to assume anyone would make light of someone they love getting hurt, and Simon is one to take this kind of thing very seriously... but this is pretty in line with the fucked up kind of “tough love” Baz is used to receiving from Fiona. She did slaughter his captors, but she also implies he should be embarrassed for being captured like that in the first place. She’s very unserious in a pretty messed up way with the whole “back seat” business. He gets no real reassurance from her. Baz wants to be loved gently, but “rough and unserious” in a delicate situation involving his well-being is what he got from her. Simon wants to do what Fiona did (slaughtering Baz’s captors) but unlike her, his first reaction (after he tellingly stops eating) is “why wasn’t I informed? I would have been faster and more efficient.” With this, Simon is criticizing the people who were in charge of protecting Baz. He’s saying he would have done a much better job of protecting him.  

When Simon tells Baz “there’s nothing about you I don’t want” it’s massive, and we don’t get Baz's reaction at all. The scene cuts there, with Simon running off. I don’t think Baz knew what to do with himself then, with that information. Until that point, the adults in his life have loved him despite certain parts of himself, pretending those parts don’t exist. So when he hears that Simon knows and loves every single part of him, he’s... blank. We don’t know how he feels then, and I don’t think he himself knows either. 

Simon expressing love

When Simon first tells Baz he loves him, he also tells him that murder is basically a love language for him (“I have killed so many things for you”). It sounds unhinged as hell, but makes perfect sense when you see his examples. Simon grew up unloved, and through the role that shaped half of his life, he learns to express love by being a protector (killing). With Baz, who has special dietary needs, he expresses love by also being a provider (also killing). As he works on himself and their relationship, as he becomes better at identifying and managing his feelings, he tells us that he can’t stand to see Baz unhappy, and that he wants to be the person who takes care of him and makes him happy. He specifically finds it thrilling to be the person who can do that for him. 

However, with everything Simon has done in his hero days, with all his power and training etc, etc, etc... when the love of his life needed to be saved, Simon “was useless” because he didn’t know. He looked for Baz everywhere he could, but he never got a real chance of finding him because no one knew shit.  This is the kind of thing that Simon avoids thinking about because it would fuck him up too much. His “I would have saved you” stands out to me, because the way he says it conveys the one way he knows to express love: murder (ha). (Considering Simon isn’t good with words, with voicing his feelings and what’s on his mind, he only starts communicating and voicing things after Baz lets him know he needs to hear it, after Baz lets him know the wordless ways he’s been conveying his love are not reaching Baz, they are getting lost in translation, etc)

It’s there in CO, even before Simon realizes the full extent of his feelings for Baz, in the way he stops eating (food is connected to love in the series) in his frustration with not being informed, in the way Penny can tell with a glance that Simon must be fantasizing with killing numpties. In awtwb, as Simon begins to work through his issues, we see how he can’t stop putting his hands on Baz. As Simon feels secure in their relationship, he’s a very touchy person (not being able to touch Baz is linked to torture and touching him to sustenance in SFC). And not all his touch is sexual. There are a lot of affectionate, playful cheek kisses, for instance... I bring this up because I noticed that in awtwb, when they talk about the numpties again, Simon incorporates touch. Alongside emphasizing he would’ve slaughtered his captors, he holds and kisses Baz, as if he could soothe and kiss the pain away. In both CO and awtwb, when the numpties incident comes up, Simon expresses love in the way that comes naturally to him, in the only ways he knows how. 

[yall-hate-kids-tourney]

Round 3: Maria Ushiromiya (Umineko: When They Cry) vs. Amane Momose (MILGRAM)

Propaganda below the cut

Maria Ushiromiya (9)

She's really obsessed with occult and witch stuff and acts inappropriately when her family gets murdered because she was told by the culprit that everyone was going to the Golden Land (a super special witch afterlife where you get whatever you want). She also has meltdowns like any autistic child. Because of this, some Umineko fans say that she deserves to get abused by her mother.

----

People really do be saying that this literal nine year old who's been abused and neglected by her mom for her whole life is evil

----

Some people in the Umineko fandom have decided that she's annoying because she's a 9 year old with autism. Personally I think she's based. She has a hard life but still tries her hardest to see the goodness in everything. She's kind, even feeling sorry for a wilting flower and hoping it'll get better. She's a very smart young girl who just isn't given the proper love a child needs from their parents to thrive. She deserved SO, SO much better than the cards life dealt her. I mustn't talk too much else I'll get emotional but Maria is peak.Best autistic witch girl.

Amane Momose (12):

Amane was voted guilty in the first trial so that she would acknowledge her guilt. It backfired, and now she’s considered a threat. Well, everyone is a threat, but nobody’s threat level has been as heavily discussed and debated as hers. Consider the next prisoner in line, Mikoto. He’s objectively more dangerous and cannot be restrained. He beat up the guard in trial 1, and he was able to hold his own when the other guilty prisoners were attacked. But a good incentive to forgive him is so that he will calm down. You know what? That’s a good incentive to forgive Amane too! But she *can* be restrained, so a good portion of the discussion went into how she should be voted guilty so she *will* be restrained and not a threat. Since her vote was a near 50/50, of course a good chunk of the voters expressed dissatisfaction with her forgiven verdict. Some are already planning to vote her guilty for trial 3, calling her a “lost cause”. She hasn’t even done any concrete harm yet. Hold the pitchforks until she actually causes harm, please? And what if she *was* voted guilty in trial 2? We’ve been warned that she will continue to deny our judgement. A second guilty verdict won’t make her better either, and then what? She’d be called a “lost cause” as well. There is no winning with her.

----

Where do I even start? So first of all she’s an cult child who was physically and mentally abused and tortured by her parents and then (presumably) murdered her mother after her mother killed a cat that she took care of.

Now everyone in Milgram is a murderer but when Amane came and her MV showed her murder and circumstance in an admittedly highly fictionalized depiction of it the audience decided to…repeat the cycle of abuse!

She was voted guilty for the main reason of “teaching her” and helping her “realize that she was abused.” I would like to note that this tough love approach is something her parents utilized against her. “We are only doing this to help you.”

So the audience replicates Amane’s abusers and repeats the cycle of abuse and that’s pretty shitty but it isn’t exactly “Fuck Em Kids” level.

And then Trial 2 happened. Cause Amane is bitter and angry and horrifically traumatized so she acts aggressive and hostile. Especially towards another prisoner.

Now, again, everyone here is a fucking murderer (of atleast could be constructed as one) These people being able to Harm is a core concept of this series.

Yet for some reason it feels like people treat Amane as a “delusional creepy kid who wants to kill people” which completly takes away the nuance of her character. She does have the capacity to harm! Everyone here does! She’s not Uniquly Dangerous! She just has a Reason to be Dangerous. A Reason we GAVE HER by REPEATING THE CYCLE OF ABUSE.

In short: In a series full of Murderers I’m honestly a bit pissed that the 12 year old abuse victim is the one who’s treated like the guy from American Pyscho.

----

TL;DR: "We metavoted this abused, indoctrinated child guilty in trial 1, but it didn't work. Now she is a threat to three grown adults: one who is fully free and two whom she has been shown to get along with. Please metavote her guilty again so she will be restrained and unable to attack them, even though that means subjecting her to further psychological torture." Amane Momose is the youngest of ten murderers, prisoners of Milgram who are to be judged innocent (forgiven) or guilty (unforgiven). In the first interrogation (voice drama), she said that what she did was in line with her religion's doctrines. If we judged her the "wrong way", she said she will just deny the verdict. Combining the voice drama and music video, you could piece together that she was raised in a cult and abused, even though she is cheerful and downplays her pain. She never shows *who* she killed, only *why* she did. After the first day of her vote, she was 81% innocent, but this wouldn't last the whole three months. Many people voted her guilty so she would "see her sins", part of the practice commonly known as "metavoting". Her innocent percentage rapidly decreased, and she hit guilty in the last 15 days, finishing at 51% guilty. At the end of the first trial, Jackalope (who is something like a host) went over all the prisoners' verdicts and commented on the general reasoning. When he got to Amane, he *laughed* at the audience for voting that way to make her realize her sins. Trial 2 rolled around, and it was revealed that Amane's victim was her abuser. On day one, she was at 74% innocent. Seems like a cut-and-dry case now, right? Well... in the intermission, two of the prisoners (Fuuta and Mahiru) were badly beaten up and became reliant on the care of Shidou, a doctor. Amane became hostile to Shidou because what he was doing was against her beliefs. She visited all three of them on their birthdays to convince them to change their ways. She seems to be especially close to Fuuta, who is now murmuring about salvation. Guilty prisoners are psychologically tortured, forced to listen to voices that reject their beliefs. Fuuta and Mahiru both say that the mental strain is worse than their physical injuries. But Amane, who also looks worse for wear, was thrown under the bus because she isn't injured and is considered a physical threat to them (never mind that she gets along with them). She's considered a threat to Shidou, a grown man who is twice her size and fully free, while she is partially restricted by the long sleeves in her trial 2 uniform. She might indoctrinate Fuuta even though, in a prison of ten people and one guard, she's the only voice of her cult. Fortunately, she got a break. Her vote was falling at a similar rate to the first trial. But this time, it stabilized at 51% innocent, 12 days before the end of her vote. But there's no way this is over.

[eivor-wolfkissed]

Replaying dragon age now that I'm older- I've actually changed my opinions about Anders a lot and honestly? I *hate* Anders. There are certain things about his character I do like, and I like the tragedy of it all. But honestly I'm just not the biggest fan of him anymore. I think he's a good example of a bad activist who ends up hurting others more than enacting good change. He's more of a selfish accelerationist, rather than someone who listens to the people and fights for change that actually benefits them, but in the long run, his actions end up hurting mages even more in my opinion. He was a better person before he ended up getting jaded and possessed by Justice, then later, Vengance.

I think another thing that fueled my dislike of him is watching his hardcore fans do terrible things on here to other people (like watching some of his chronically online white fans accuse people of color within fandom of supporting police brutality just because they liked certain characters or held nuanced opinions about the templar/mage stuff, and misgender/exclude trans fans from queer fandom spaces for the same reasons stated above, to name a few things). All of these things combined have lead me to just be extremely annoyed by Anders overall. Not to mention his dick behavior towards other companions- like supporting Hawke selling Fenris into slavery, while pretending to be a freedom fighter? Lmao. Cringeworthy. Anders is not a morally good character by any means. For the things I do like- I do always side with the mages in DA2, and I fully support the actions taken to help mages escape the Kirkwall circle specifically. I really enjoyed doing the side quests with the mage underground. I love Anders' refusal to be caged and his determination to live freely (just wish he respected that in others and didn't support selling Fenris into slavery simply because he didn't agree with him. That's beyond selfish and straight up diabolical. Again, another thing that reminds me of IRL white leftists who refuse to deconstruct their bigotry). I just think the final action of destroying the chantry only invited chaos and didn't actually help mages at all (see the violence in DAI and how many innocent less powerful mages get killed by mobs of non mages because they no longer have protection. The circles needed a lot of changes but ripping them away completely and suddenly left a vacuum and invited way too much chaos imo).

And to be clear, this isn't a post with intent to shame all Anders fans. Not all of his fans act in the way I outlined earlier- just a particular, small but loud subset of them I have observed up close and interacted with one on one in the past. I don't think it's wrong to like this character at all- it's silly to claim that someone is morally wrong for liking a fictional character. There are things I still enjoy about his character! However growing up, getting a little wiser about activism, and watching *some* (not all) of his fans act like genuine bigots towards other dragon age fans, have made me lose more and more enthusiasm for him overall. It's also extrordinarily tiring to watch extremely sheltered and privileged people who have never witnessed acts of mass violence say that his final act of blowing up a church is Good and Moral when in actuality, it ended up murdering people who had nothing to do with the conflict. I do firmly believe that people who are gung ho about that action have a very idealized view of violence and do not actually comprehend how horrific and traumatizing these acts are on societies as a whole. It only ends up hurting the most vulnerable people and does nothing but invite violent chaos. I will fully admit I used to be one of those people, until I actually talked with and listened to real life refugees and other people who have experienced acts of terrorism and violent revolution in their respective home countries. These things always impact the most vulnerable members of society in horrific ways, and never actually holds people in power responsible... and all too often, pushes societies into even more authoritarianism.

Anyways. That's my essay on why Anders now annoys me greatly as an adult fan and why I veiw him more as a tragically doomed character rather than a freedom fighter. Anders, to me, is a terrorist in it for him and his. Not a freedom fighter. Everything stated here is my personal opinion- I'm not interested in debating people on my post, only sharing what I now think of this character- any kind of combative harassment added to this post will be ignored, blocked, and deleted.

It will be interesting to see what happens after I post this. If this post upsets you, please ignore it and do something healthy with your emotions, please do not engage in bullying.

[smytherines]

Once again thinking about how Owen was still shaking and grabbing at the banana peel when Curt ran away. Thinking about how Owen tried to point out how absurd it was to leave a banana peel lying around in the first place, and Curt steamrolled him by saying "who gives a shit?"

How Curt dismissed Owen and treated him like a nuisance for chastising him for drinking and leaving shit on the ground, and for wanting to re-lock the safety barricades to limit the explosion. How Curt didn't have the equipment he thought he would because the color of the rocket shoes didn't match his outfit.

How the explosion was Curt's idea, and he could have simply used the watch to send the blueprints and they both would've gotten out of there safely. But he wanted to be cool. He wanted to be a badass. (and personally, I think he probably wanted to save face with Owen after having to get rescued and getting chewed out by his boss)

I don't think Curt was incompetent in A1P1, but I do think he was a cocky asshole with a bruised ego. I have to be honest, I don't understand the impulse to flatten his character into "He was an awesome babygirl but then a sad thing just kinda happened to him, schwoopsie" when his ego and hubris leading to Owen's demise is the entire point of the scene. Curt having faults and fucking up is what sets that character up to have an arc at all.

In the 54 Below concert there's a part of the spoken introductions where Tessa Netting says "when these two spies are together, they are gay and unstoppable," and the next line is "that is- until Curt's ego gets in the way." In the commentary for SAF there are several points where TCB mentions Curt's ego, his hubris, his vanity- because they are important pieces of the puzzle for understanding who this guy is. Without that context, the choices his character makes in A1P1 don't make any sense (which is why I think some people read him as just kinda being a dipshit)

There's a reason he spent four years blaming himself for Owen's death- it was his fault. It's a crucial part of his character development, and it makes him a much more interesting and nuanced character than "he just did a lil fucksy-wucksy" does.

I'm not even going to get into the way the fandom absolutely refuses to engage with Curt's alcohol use, or how they make up details about Owen to make him more of a cartoon character villain (like the idea that he orchestrated the events of the show specifically to hurt/kill Curt when he doesn't even know Curt is there until Curt interrupts the arms deal) or how they pretend that Owen doesn't have a canon traumatic event that informs who he becomes (which, to be clear, is someone who tortures and murders people- thinking of Owen as an actual human character instead of a Snidely Whiplash villain doesn't mean ignoring how fucked up he is)

I probably should have said all that anonymously through the confessions blog like everyone else is doing, but frankly there are so few Owen defenders everyone would probably know it was me anyways. Also I'm just confident I know the show well enough to defend my points under my own name.

I spent days telling myself to just ignore it, don't let my autism win here, but this show is so complex and well-written, and has so much space for a subtextual reading of it, that it really bothers me to see these weird, messy, interesting, fucked up characters sanded down to Good Guy vs Bad Guy

[maxwell-grant]

What do you think of Vega/Balrog/Claw and where do you think his story should go if they brought him back for SF6?

Vega is a perfect fighting game villain because he is as frustrating to challenge as he is satisfying to defeat, and I do think he's a lot more compelling as an antagonistic force towards the likes of Chun-Li or Ken or Cammy than he is as a character unto himself. There's some reasons why the fights with Vega, in the animated movie or in II V or in the Udon comic, tend to be seen as the high points of Street Fighter adaptations.

Largely because as an antagonist to them, he is uniquely vicious and horrifying and murderous to an extent no other SF character is, he escalates any situation into a fight for survival just by walking into the room, while still occasionally allowing strange moments of poignancy due to his skewed honor and priorities, at least when Cammy is involved, and also being by design extremely satisfying to beat and watch get beaten. He is not just a punchable goon and smug champion like Balrog, he is also a creep and a serial killer, and an extremely privileged one at that, which makes beating and humiliating him a moral imperative on top of everything else. That, along with the fact that he's blatantly cheating with that claw and protecting his face with a mask, not just because he is desperate to preserve his good looks but because he doesn't even want to touch you as he kills you, is part of what makes him arguably the most punchable character in the series, or at least, the best designed for that purpose. That is, of course, if the player can catch him, which his whole playstyle is designed to avoid. Vega can and will fly circles around you as he wears you down, and like any nobleman, he will attack you from distances and positions you can't strike him back from, and it will wear on your patience, making it all the more satisfying if you do catch and smash him, which is still a big If.

And as a character onto himself, he's someone who's pretty much got his life figured out and as a result only truly wants what he can't have. He is a nobleman who's been gifted with wealth, power, skill, charm, intellect, beauty, and everything he could possibly desire, including the ability to kill people with impunity on a regular basis. He is a guy who lives his perfect life, but who still takes it upon himself to put on a mask and go out at night and viciously murder people he deems ugly, not just because their existence makes his world less perfect for it, but because championing the superiority of beauty by subjugating the ugly is the only form of meaning Vega can find in life. He lives reveling in his own futility and only comes alive when faced with a challenge he can take pleasure in vanquishing, which is right around the time when he either loses and vanishes to preserve his pride, or gets his face smashed or even just touched and flies into a searing rage, because of course deep down he will not accept being bested on the only battlefield that matters to him. He is a disgusting and violent hypocrite who has little need for nuance, and so far being this has worked out pretty great for him.

But he isn't just a violent horrible sadist, there is a specificity to him that makes him scarier than if he was just that. He's an intelligent, cultured and traveled man who has an extremely strong sense of justice guided by his thinking in extremely binary good-evil terms, it's just that he's traded his moral core with his aesthetic judgement. He's replaced the concept of good and evil with beauty and ugliness, which is not even that far off from the way the upper class treats those to begin with. He throws parties for the wealthiest and most powerful of society, but he resents the attendants, because he finds worship of money and power to be ugly. He throws his lot with Shadaloo because they enable his tendencies and afford to let him keep living his lifestyle, but he resents everyone he works with inside of it because they are ugly and crude (and he's frequently paired with Balrog, a guy who embodies everything he hates). He fights to save the Dolls and saves Cammy's life, but he is disgusted by the existence of the Dolls not because of the, everything involving their creation, but because he thinks it's a waste of beauty and is offended at the idea of turning those he deems beautiful into puppets. It is in fact pretty funny that he's appalled at Bison for what almost consist moral grievances but really are just aesthetic ones, while Bison himself, a guy who is literally made of evil, has frequently expressed annoyance and even a little bit of disgust at Vega's obsession, in a "I kill people too, you don't see me being such a weirdo about it" way.

And something I find interesting about Vega, and part of why I do think they miss the mark sometimes in making him a tad too much of a sadist or pervert (like his win quotes in V about bathing in blood, when the whole reason for the claw and mask used to be that he dislikes blood and touching the opponent directly) is that he isn't a vile murderous bastard just because, or just because of the trauma regarding his mother's murder, but because he is a nobleman who was raised to see the world the way a nobleman does. They've gone back and forth over the years on whether his mom's murder was at the hands of his birth father or stepfather, but a detail that tends to be glossed over is the fact that Vega gets his entire moral outlook from her and his environment:

He gains his looks and personality from his mother, with the addition of corrupted feelings planted in the back of his mind during his upbringing. Vega lost sight to the meaning of life at a tender age and started to cling to his mother's beauty, which grew into strong extremism. Those who were not deemed beautiful were not of value, and only the beautiful were worthy of survival. This is why in order to prove his strength Vega enters the arena as a prerequisite of beauty. - SF2 profile

He was born the only child of a beautiful noblewoman from a fallen house, and an ugly but wealthy man. His twisted thoughts, obsessions and value system regarding beauty were all handed down to him by his mother. Her twisted thoughts went unrewarded, as she was murdered by her own husband. Vega was profoundly affected by this, and this trauma is said to be the reason Vega insists on maiming his opponents. - 30th Anniversary Collection

He is a guy driven by the same standards of self-improvement and excellence through combat that drive most of the other characters, except in his case, he believes that beauty is the truest form of strength, that it is the only thing that matters, that the order of the world dictates that beautiful people must never lose, and the worst thing that ever happened to him was a triumph of uglyness so world-shattering that every imperfect-looking person in the world must pay for it. Like a ninja, he is true to his code, offering second chances to fighters he deems beautiful (if only so he may savor the honor of beautifully killing them at the right time), and he is true to his high society upbringing, in that he lives to uphold and enforce a disgusting prejudiced worldview that just so conveniently puts himself at the top of everyone else, a worldview he lubricates with the blood of his opponents and a worldview that crumbles as soon as the mask comes off. He is profoundly disgusting in a way that does a lot to reinforce how evil Shadaloo is for not just enabling him but directing him, and he remains the absolute worst person inside of it no matter how much he may think of himself as above Shadaloo.

And as for him in SF6? I could honestly do without seeing any major Shadaloo players show up for 6, or even much of any of the old characters period. I wouldn't be upset if he returned, given the wonderful job they've done so far on all the returning characters and new ones, I'm sure there would be room for them to do something interesting involving him and the Neo Shadaloo goobers trying to get away from the evil past of Shadaloo that Vega embodied, but I kinda don't want to see him again unless it's to see Chun-Li throw a couch at him again or lightning kick his face through a wall and off of a building, which is not just a high point of the series, but the most beautiful thing that ever involved Vega.

[camp-counselor-david]

I was wondering what bugged me about the season 4 Cameron Campbell redemption arc, and I think it finally clicked for me. (And yeah it's 95% David related)

Tw for talks of abuse under the read more.

(Spoiler warning for s3 & 4!)

My relationship (from a character standpoint) with Mr. Campbell is very iffy. He's meant for comedic relief, as is his treatment of David within the series.

Side note- I know that the wolf in "The Forest" being a metaphor for Campbell's abuse of David isn't technically canon even if it's pretty widely accepted by now, so I'll be excluding that part in my analysis.

Mr. Campbell goes through a lot of changes within the series. He starts out as sort of a criminal mastermind type. Self-serving, a blatant scammer, and someone who is seen abusing David in particular many times in the show, physically and verbally. That's not even mentioning the scene in "Jasper Dies in the End," where he attempts to murder a young David for witnessing Jasper's near-death experience. Despite this, David looks up to him and idolizes who he is as a person.

Up until when things peak in season 3, where it's revealed to David that he's not only a terrible person, but he has attempted to frame him for the camp being a scam. Season 3 handles Campbell the best in my opinion, up until the ending of "Camp Corp" where it's decided that Cameron Campbell is more of an idiot than a mastermind, so his new punishment is staying at the camp under David's watch.

Season 4 is where it takes a turn for the worse. As per usual, David is on board with the idea of redeeming Mr. Campbell and places faith in him changing for the better. This didn't bug me until the episode with the escape room where the series begins to explore a different side of Campbell. There, it's revealed that despite how awful as a person he was, he secretly has some type of heart! He still had feelings for the woman he ghosted for 17 years to the point of never once seeing another person in all of that time. Not only does that feel impossible to believe, but given how he acts when he's coming back from the club in "Keep the Change," it feels a lot more like a retcon to me. You're telling me that someone as greedy as him would make such a responsible choice when it comes to any of his personal relationships? In 17 years? While regularly being under the influence of alcohol and other drugs throughout that time period?

It felt like a quick "See? Mr. Campbell isn't actually that bad of a person!" To which I feel is not the right angle to take with his character, at least not so quickly. I understand that characters can have nuance. They can have good traits and still be bad people, but these traits have to line up with what makes sense for the character, and from my perspective, it didn't.

They then change the approach with Campbell and start making him a lot more reasonable of a person in the way he talks. "Time Crapsules" ending with an admittedly nice message from him about change using the camp itself as a metaphor for his own character growth, which becomes apparent in the last prominent Campbell episode, "St. Campbell's Day."

This is the episode that urks me the most. Since the very beginning, David has had full faith in Mr. Campbell. He spent time making excuses for him and going out of his way to prove that change is really possible. But (spoilers, sorry!!) then this episode features the very first time that David stands up against Mr. Campbell. He sees the fake holiday that he's making for presumably self-serving reasons and decides that Campbell is showing his old patterns again-- because why else would he make up a holiday revolving around making money?

David ruins the holiday by stealing the holiday supplies and reporting him to the presses as a con artist. Then, the show reveals that David was overreacting, and this was really pushed by the campers rather than Campbell himself. They wanted to raise funds for the camp to get new things like the outhouse, and David feels bad. Afterward, there's a happy moment where David apologetically fixes everything with the help of Gwen and QM, which is admittedly very sweet, and Mr. Campbell forgives David for jumping the gun and assuming the worst.

While I don't hate this, it just rubs me the wrong way that the one time David stands up against Campbell, he's punished by the narrative. He apologizes to Mr. Campbell, a thing that Campbell never properly does for David, the one who actually deserves it.

This episode could have been a good opportunity for there to be some reflection on how David, who vouched ceaselessly for his redemption, might have some mixed feelings on his abuser. Exploring this side of things more would have made this a better episode and overall a better arc for me rather than "Silly David!! You've ruined the one good thing he tried to do!".

The concept of David wanting to be happy about the changes but finding that part of him guiltily thinks that Campbell doesn't deserve it is something I really wish they explored a lot more.

The tl;dr of this is that the Mr. Campbell redemption arc isn't a bad angle to shoot for! Some of it was handled decently, but the loose ends that we'll likely never see wrapped up leave a sour taste in my mouth. A few kind moments don't make up for around 14 years of abuse, and that's not even mentioning the death of Jasper as a consequence of Campbell's actions.

I love this show a lot, and this is by no means hateful towards it, I just feel a little put off by how they handle the Campbell-David stuff.

[flower-boi16]

Given how underdeveloped Vaggie (Why was she named that), Charlie, Millie, and the majority of the female characters are, I won’t be suprised if Lilith turns out to be a one dimensional bitch who only exists to make Lucifer more sympathetic (I like Lucifer’s character but still)

....I disagree, Lilith could actually be a good, or even great antagonist for the show, possibly being one of, if not THE best villain in all of Hellaverse...

...if she's not being written by Viv. I've already talked about Velvette and why she's on of Viv's best antagonists before but she's relevant to my main point; Velvette is a character with an actually cunning, entertaining and well-developed personality that stands out from other antagonists in Hellaverse, making her feel like a breath of fresh air compared to all of Viv's one-dimensional assholes, being an actually good villain...she's also a female character whose episode she got a major focus on...wasn't written by Viv.

We all know Viv is incapable of writing antagonists let alone female antagonists, so, the reason why Velvette ended up being so great compared to Viv's other antagonists is BECAUSE she wasn't being written by Viv or Adam. Viv can't write antagonists or women, so when one of her female antagonists ends up being so great, it's because she's not being written by Viv, but rather, someone who knows how to write female characters.

In episode 2, the episode that IS written by Viv, and where Velvette makes her first appearance, she has a more typical fashionista personality compared to episode 3 (though tbf that's still more of a personality than 99% of Viv's other antagonists), and episode 3, the episode not written by Viv, she has a fully fleshed out personality that makes her a fun antagonist. I really don't think that's just a coincidence.

An guess what? This same thing happened AGAIN in episode 6 with Sera. Sera is the head seraphim and leader of Heaven, she greenlit the exterminations in order to protect Heaven but you get the feeling that she doesn't WANT to do this, that she doesn't feel great about letting Adam and his army murder people bellow. But she feels like she HAS TO in order to protect Heaven...and her sister, Emily.

Initially, in my post about Emily, I said she has no purpose or point as a character, and removing her changes nothing. I was wrong. Emily DOES have a purpose within the show; it's to be a main motivator for Sera, and Emily's existence adds depth to her character. Sera lets the exterminations happen because she also wants to protect Emily and deeply cares about her, she holds her sister close to her and wants to keep her safe.

Sera is a character with real nuances to her actions, she's not just a one-dimensional villain, she's not exactly good either, she's...an actually nuanced and morally grey character that can't be put in either good or evil? In a VIVZIEPOP show???? Like, not saying that Sera is a super deep or compelling character or anything, but like, she's an actually nuanced antagonist with real depth to her...

...and that's because the episode she's in was not written by Viv, just like with Velvette. The reason why Sera is an actually nuanced character is because she's not in an episode written by Viv.

The fact that this happened twice does not seem like a coincidence to me. The reason why Velvette and Sera can be actually decent or even good characters is because they are in episodes that aren't written by Viv or Adam, both of which in all of the episodes they write show the many problems with HH and HB's antagonists. And, ultimately, Velvette and Sera ended up being two of the BEST antagonists in all of Hellaverse because they weren't being written by Viv or Adam.

So, there COULD be a possibility that Lilith can be a good or at least decent antagonist if the episodes she gets a significant spotlight in aren't written by Viv or Adam. If they are...then well, ya, Lilith will probably just be Stella 2.0 or something.

But if she's being written by either of the two guys who did episodes 3 & 6, then she could end up being a good or even great character. The bare is very low for antagonists in these shows, but when they aren't being written by Viv or Adam...they can be kinda good.