#media archetypes

[moonsghostwriter]

Types of Yanderes

The different archetypes of yanderes in media

TRIGGER WARNINGS: Mentions of Murder, Suicide/Self-Harm and Domestic Violence

•Mugai-gata: The Harmless Type

"As long as they're happy, I'm happy"

The most harmless type of yandere, the one where they've fallen in love in an unhealthy, obsessive way, but they don't do anything insane about it. They'll try hard to become your partner, but won't harm anybody in the way. If you get a partner, they won't attack you two, they'll be happy you found happiness, and maybe still have hope that you choose them in the end.

•Kanchigai-gata: The Wrong-Idea Type

"They gave me an eraser...they must like me!"

They get the wrong idea when you do something in order to match their expectations. If you say you don't love them, they'll think you're lying because you don't want to hurt them or something. If you do something out of kindness to them, they'll think it's out of love. And so on.

•Shuuchaku-gata: The Obsessive Type

"I sent you 50 messages, why didn't you answer? Where were you? What were you doing?"

Tries to learn everything about you. Personal info, hobbies, routine, etc. Sends regular messages to check on you, asks why you haven't answered if you didn't, wants to know what you're doing always. All the time. And, if possible, walks around with you all the time too.

The obsession type doesn't necessarily want to monopolize you. They'll let you hang around with friends, etc. but wants to know everything you do. They probably want to go with you, too. If they can't go somewhere with you, they might stalk you.

If they learn a person is too close to you, they might attack.

•Sutookaa-gata: The Stalker Type

Follows you around, often without you knowing. May be in broad daylight or at night, when you're walking alone on the streets. Maybe even online. A person of this type is also often of the obsessive type.

•Dokusen-gata: The Monopoly Type

"Why were you talking to them? I thought I told you not to talk to them."

They want to monopolize you. Will ask who you talk to and hang with, in extreme cases won't let you be with anyone else, not even your friends.

This type of behavior is unfortunately common in real life. It displays insecurities and lack of trust in the relationship which might develop into much worse yandere behavior.

•Ison-gata: The Dependent Type

"Where are you going? Are you leaving me? Please don't leave me, I need you! I can't live without you!"

Can't live without you. Begs you to not leave them or throw them away. Says they will die if you go away. May lose will to do anything if you aren't watching. If you do leave, they might go full crazy and end up doing something crazy like going on a murderous rampage or something.

•Touei-gata: The Projection Type

"You're just like them."

After their former love turned out to be a completely different person than they loved, or got a partner, or died, or something like that, and they can no longer stay with them, they searched for someone who was just like what their love was, and they found you.

This type of of yandere is very innocent at first, but if they're given power to dominate their new beloved, they might end up trying to make them more and more like what their old interest was. For example, wearing the same things, doing the same things, etc.

Sometimes, they might project her ideal lover not on someone else but on same person. That is, they might say "you are not them, they do this," to you even though you actually are them and you don't do "this."

•Shoushitsu-gata: The Disappearance Type

"They'll never love me, so what's the point in living?"

They love you, maybe you know that, maybe you don't, but unknown this gives them a crushing depression. They think you'll never love them and they have no chance, but they can't stop their unhealthy feelings of love. They think you're too good for them, or that they're too worthless for you. This makes them slowly fade away, disappear from your life. Until they snap and kill themself

This is an atypical yandere since it has so little effect on other characters' lives.

•Shuumatsu-gata: The Final Type

"I don't need a world where they don't exist."

After learning that you died or you left them, they lose purpose in life. The world for them was you, and you're now gone. What this results in varies. Most of the time, they become broken emotionally, as expected. They might also kill themself, or sometimes, they might destroy the world that let you die/"took you away from them", or just go on revenge killing spree.

•Boruyoku-gata: The Violent Type

"I'm hurting you? That's too bad, I told you not to do that!"

When jealous, feeling ignored, etc. uses violence against you. They'll beat you and say it's your fault. This can be either discharging pent-up rage through violence and you just happen to be their favorite punching bag, or deliberately punishing you for doing something they didn't like.

Both cases, unfortunately, are also common in real life.

•Haijo-gata: The Removal Type

"You don't need other people. You have me."

They will remove from your life everyone they think you don't need. Which means everyone else. This can include things like excluding your contacts and messages to even murdering everybody who approaches.

This type of yandere has two sub-types:

First, the one that removes people secretly. They see you hanging with someone, the next day that person has mysteriously disappeared. You are probably as clueless as a sheet blank paper about this incident, and the next several incidents like it.

Second, the one that removes people openly. This also ranges from removing messages to killing people. They might be expecting you agree with them, "yeah, you're right, I don't need other people," or they might just want to show you what they're capable of.

•Shinjuu-gata: The Double Suicide Type

"Let's be together forever!"

Why be always together in life if you can be forever together for all eternity? This type of yandere will propose what no sane person would: let's die!

Sadly, suicide pacts are a thing. Double suicide, lovers' suicide, too, is a thing. One of the most famous pieces of literature, Romeo & Juliet, sort of ended up in a double suicide.

One thing different in an yandere double suicide is that, often, you don't really want to die. It's more like they want you both dead and they'll kill you then themself. Although there are also actual consensual attempted double suicides involving yandere.

•Jiko-gisei-gata: The Self-Sacrifice Type

"I would die for you."

They'd make any sacrifice for you, as long as it means getting you to love them. They don't even mind dying for you or fighting bloody battles, sustaining multiple injuries, etc. as long as it means staying with you.

Unlike the self-harm type, the self-sacrifice type isn't seeking attention with their suicidal behavior. Instead, they want to make themself useful and support the one they love.

This is easier to visualize in anime where fighting monsters, etc. is normal. However, this kind of sickness also exists in real life. Some people do sacrifice themselves for a beloved one in an extremely unhealthy and unrewarding way, just because they "love" them.

•Suuhai-gata: The Worship Type

"I would do anything you ask of me, I am devoted to you."

They worship you and will do anything for you. Sometimes even without you asking. And more: they don't even mind if you love them or not, or what will happen to them. Killing, dying, committing crimes, losing respect of others, they'll do anything if it means providing support to your infinite greatness.

This is one of the least-harmful type of yandere since they would never do anything to harm you and will never be in your way. Nonetheless, it's also one of the most depressing types; it makes you feel sorry for the yandere, who thinks of themself less like a person and more like a tool who might get thrown away if they're not useful enough.

The difference between the "worship" type and the "self-sacrifice" type is that the "worship" type is also like the "disappearance" type. The "self-sacrifice" type wants to be useful so they can be loved, the "worship" type doesn't mind if they are not loved back, in fact, they probably thinks they are not worth being loved by the delusive greatness they consider you.

They wouldn't, for example, attack your partner or other people out of jealousy, but they might attack a person approaching you because they think the person is stepping out of your boundaries and being presumptuous by daring talk to your greatness without proper respect.

•Choukyou-gata: The Training Type

"Say you love me... come on, say it. Say you love me. SAY YOU LOVE ME! Good! Here's your reward."

The word choukyou was once only about training animals or breaking animals. In modern times, it's also used in BDSM contexts, dominate training submissive. It has nothing to do with training for sports.

They'll break you into loving them.Sometimes using torture, a punishment/reward system, brainwashing, etc. This probably involves you getting kidnapped and forced into it, although there might be more subtle ways to accomplish this.

•Koritsu yuudou-gata: The Loneliness-Inductive Type

"Shh it's alright. You didn't need them anyways. I'm here, you can always count on me."

They will make, induce, or force you to feel or be alone. By spreading malicious rumors about you that make others alienate you, by murdering your friends and family, etc. Then they'll jump in and present themself as the only one you can count on when you're most fragile mentally and in need of company.

Inducing things that don't make you feel lonely but give some sort of mental damage, trauma, also count as this type. Conversely, if your friends and family get killed on their own and you're alone but they had nothing to do with it, it's not the same thing since they didn't induce it, although an yandere might abuse your condition to get closer to you.

This type is similar to the "dependence" type, except it's not the yandere that's to become dependent on you, it's you that's to become dependent on the yandere.

•Kyouki-gata: The Bizarre-Seeking Type

"I love you, so... can you give me your fingernails? I want them so I can always have a part of you with me!"

Undeniably in my opinion the weirdest type of yandere. They will murder you, and not by accident, not by jealousy, not by revenge. They will murder you because they love you. And then they'll keep your rotting corpse in their bed, or home, or preserved in some way because there's no way they'd throw you away.

In a sense sane people are better off not even trying to understand, the bizarre-seeking type of yandere is purely insane, mad way beyond explanation.Undeniably the worst type of yandere, she will murder you, and not by accident, not by jealousy, not by revenge. She will murder you because she loves you. And then she'll keep your rotting corpse on bed or preserved inside a glass because there's no way she'd throw you away.

In a sense sane people are better off not even trying to understand, the bizarre-seeking type of yandere is purely insane, mad way beyond explanation.

The word kyouki, used in the type's name, is normally associated with disturbing imagery involving gore, blood and worse stuff. It's also related to "grotesque" art, guro グロ, which's dubbed "pornography involving gore" despite the fact nobody in their sane mind can figure out how the fuck can someone even get off to this

Likewise, nobody in their sane mind can relate to the grotesque love of bizarre-seeking yandere. Ranging from murder, mutilation, and maybe something ever worse us mere mortals can't even begin to imagine, their bizarre displays of love can only be summed up by: what the actual fuck?

•Mousou-gata: The Delusional Type

Similar to the "wrong idea" type above, but far worse.

When their insane love is unrequited (for obvious reasons), and you start literally running away from the crazy bitch, they'll think it's because you're embarrassed, and not because you don't want them. Their love distorts the reality they perceive. They see a bunch of delusions instead.

The delusion type may also be in denial something unpleasant happened. They'll just forget it happened. Their memories may also be replaced with delusions: they'll remember you being extremely nice to them when you were indifferent, you saying you liked them before you even met, or other people rubbing themselves on you like cheap sluts when all they did was saying "good morning"

•Jishou-gata: The Self-Harm Type

"If you leave me, I'll hurt myself!"

They harm themself, cutting wrists, etc. in order to get your attention. This often happens when they're ignored. The "dependence" type might evolve into this if they are abandoned.

There are two sub-types to this.

First, the one where they harm themself in secret and have you notice their injuries, then they say "it's nothing to worry about" hoping you worry about it more. This is usually something light like a knee bruise or small scratch, etc.

Second, the one where they harm themself in your face as a way to say "I'll kill myself if you leave me," forcing you to stay by their side out of guilt.

And that's all for now! If you find yourself or a loved one in a relationship with a person that seems to act similar to any of these behaviors, please, please, please leave them/help your loved one to leave them. This is all supposed to be about fictional archetypes, however sometimes someone who is severely mentally ill or simply a bad person can exhibit these behaviors and it is UNSAFE!!! If you find yourself relating to any of the yandere types themselves, please seek mental help.

And if you're reading this because you like horror/psychological thrillers then I hoped you enjoyed and feel more informed about the yandere archetype! I had a lot of fun compiling this list.

[prokopetz]

I think the biggest thing that's helped me to stop being annoyed by odd charactersation in fandom media is realising that much of it isn't really about its ostensible source material. It's basically a bunch of nerds re-inventing the commedia dell'arte from first principles. You've got roughly a dozen broadly sketched archetypes with pre-defined roles, and while they may appear in guises taken from popular media, it's really always the same "characters" in a variety of masks. Sometimes the Grumpy DILF wears a Bruce Wayne mask and hangs out in the Batcave; sometimes the Grumpy DILF wears a Luke Skywalker mask and has telekinesis; it doesn't terribly matter what Bruce Wayne or Luke Skywalker are "really" like in in their respective source material, because the persona is just a framing device – this week the Grumpy DILF is a superhero, next week he's a space mystic, and so forth. What will the Grumpy DILF be next?

[saintmeghanmarkle]

Another BTS leaked image shows exactly what we already knew. Nobody cares about these two. This is why theyve obsessively tried to control the images that are released during this sad little trip. by u/Upper_Charge_4449

Another BTS leaked image shows exactly what we already knew…. Nobody cares about these two. This is why they’ve obsessively tried to control the images that are released during this sad little trip. https://ift.tt/h4rxstM post link: https://ift.tt/vxzYyMc author: Upper_Charge_4449 submitted: August 17, 2024 at 09:18PM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.

[spop-romanticizes-abuse]

shadow weaver: i care about the safety of everyone in etheria and i’m actively trying to help protect everyone

fans: omg shadow weaver evil!! she’s just selfish and wants to drive catra and adora apart!

catra: i’m going to abandon adora on her deathbed just because she didn’t choose ME over the safety of the entire world. i only care about adora if she prioritizes me over literally everything else.

fans: poor catra, she’s so right! she just wants adora to be happy!

[possamble]

I do think it's a really valuable exercise for anyone to build a habit where you like... When a dark-skinned character skeeves you out, just take a second to ask yourself where that's coming from. Is it canon character traits or conjecture? Would you react the same way if they were light-skinned?

Maybe, at the end of it, you might be able to pinpoint a real personal reason why you're averse to the character. And that's fair! I just think we all benefit from being honest with ourselves. Sometimes a reflex happens so quietly, you don't notice unless someone points it out. It literally happens to everyone once in a while--lifelong conditioning doesn't go away just because you realized it's wrong to think those things consciously. Don't be so afraid of being wrong that you never examine yourself!

[daxnorman]

The Trickster

[turianjournalist]

Controversial opinion but I don’t think Criston Cole deserves the same level of hate that fucking Joffrey or Ramsay got

[couldtransitionsaveher]

Archetype Exploration: Perfect Soldiers

(Hey, please look at this blog's pinned post before reading this post; it gives a lot of context for the lens I'm looking at these characters through, k thx. also, shoutout to @finalgirl-nihilbliss for guessing the archetype)

CW: Abuse, Projection, Surface-Level Media Analysis

If your comfort character exhibits any of the following symptoms:

constant brooding

face frozen in a perpetual scowl

possession of a "dark past" they don't like to talk about

frequent blank stares into the middle distance

constantly trains for something uncertain

You may have just found yourself in the presence of a Perfect Soldier.

Perfect soldiers are characters who were groomed, often from birth, for the sole purpose of inflicting harm on their fellow man. These characters are efficient, tactically-minded, and above all else, violent. Perfect soldiers will often excel at combat and strategy, but struggle with emotional sensitivity.

Note that just because these characters are violent and closed off now doesn't mean that this is their natural temperament. Often, perfect soldiers have some kind of natural compassion that was stomped out through years of abuse training. This can come in the form of a sole loved one who tragically died, but more often than not, it simply manifests as a soft side sanded away.

If the Perfect Soldier doesn't start that way, who is to blame for their transformation? In sci-fi and fantasy, this transformation is usually caused by a morally corrupt institution built to churn out perfect soldiers (the Jedi Academy, the Galalunan Military Academy, the Space Marine Legions, etc.). Other times, perfect soldiers are groomed raised by a cruel and abusive father figure (Endeavor, Bro Strider, Belos, etc.). Some settings even blend the two by having an institution with a twisted general (think Shadow Weaver from She-Ra).

Typically, if a perfect soldier has a character arc, it's usually one of healing and letting go of their anger. This almost always contains at least two of these three steps in the order of your choosing:

The perfect soldier leaves the institution of their torment, either by circumstance or by excommunication. Once on the outside, they'll typically find that their raw might is irrelevant to their survival, and they'll instead need to rely on their lacking social skills. This exit from the comfort zone will prompt the soldier to learn a lot of people skills, typically leading to a "softening up" of sorts. Note that this doesn't have to be a literal escape from a physical place. Rather, it could just be a character being outside their guardian's zone of influence.

The perfect soldier discovers some imperfection with their guardian/institution. Perhaps there's some kind of inconsistency in its moral values. Other times, the soldier finds a secret the guardian/institution has been covering up. Whatever it is, this will prompt the soldier to question their leaders' infallibility.

The perfect soldier meets a person who shows concern for them in spite of the soldier's outward hostility. This outside party will likely witness or hear about the perfect soldier's tumultuous upbringing and take pity on them. This will likely prompt an attempt to reach out to the soldier, something which may or may not be rejected. Whatever the case, this act compassion will likely stick with the soldier, and prompt them to think about their own worth.

An arc like this usually resolves with a direct confrontation with the abusive mentor(s) who turned them into a weapon of war. If the soldier is a member of the supporting cast, this may come in the form of some heroic self-sacrifice, usually to protect the aforementioned outside party. Alternatively, if the soldier is a protagonist, their confrontation will likely be much more active, and may even be a proper fight. The soldier tends to win this fight either with the power of friendship or compassion but this isn't a strict requirement. If the writers really want to get spicy with it, they might even spare their tormentor, really leaning into the idea of abandoning violence (note that this runs the risk of coming off as a "forgive your abusers" narrative).

Alternatively, the lack of a grand confrontation can be a form of narrative resolution in and of itself. Living well is the best revenge, after all, and showing that our former perfect soldier has moved on to a happier, more peaceful life can be a far stronger statement of growth than a glitzy fight to the death.

(This is the part where I tie this whole thing back into the gimmick of the account. If you just wanted a Trope Talk style summary of the archetype, you've seen all there is to see. Thanks for reading, and don't forget to do your daily clicks.)

Why do you keep submitting this?

So, out of all the characters that I've seen submitted, this is easily the most prolific character archetype. At the time of writing, somewhere between 40-50 characters that have been posted roughly fit this archetype, and that's not including any of the characters I haven't posted yet.

Why do submitters connect this particular trope with trans women so damn much?

Firstly, it's important to consider that in most western fiction, the soldier is an inherently masculine archetype. From the classical epics of the Odyssey and the Iliad, to the superheroes and action stars of modern-day blockbusters, there's a very real conflation between a character's manhood and a character's capacity to do violence. A lot of mainstream military propaganda does the same, suggesting that men who enlist are more "authentically masculine" than those who don't. This archetype serves as a critique of that idea; it shows us that this masculine ideal can be, and often is, a soul-crushing experience. In a sense, the idea of transitioning serves as an escape from this image.

Furthermore, it's important to consider what this character arc is actually about: a miserable character discovering that a better life is possible, and making steps to achieve personal peace. Often, these characters are fiercely loyal to the institutions that take advantage of them. These characters are often fine with it because they can't conceive of a better world. Once that's presented to them, that's when they start to leave. Frankly, given that a lot of people still don't end up knowing about trans folks until they're adults, I'm surprised more trans people don't connect to characters like this.

Finally, this arc gets back to the core question at the center of this blog: could transition have saved her? The archetype, in its construction necessitates a level of misery, ergo it implies that the character needs saving. It's no wonder these characters tend to garner a lot of Hurt/Comfort fanfic (Anakin Skywalker alone has more Hurt/Comfort fic than some of my favorite fandoms period). There's an inherent desire for these characters have better lives, and maybe some estrogen could do it.

This is my best guess, anyway. If you have thoughts, feel free to share them.

[werewolfgenesis]

no one knows my favorite kind of characters are traumatized blondes and short men that are mean

[florbelles]

— CHARACTER ARCHETYPES

tagged by @strafethesesinners, @simplegenius042 & @voidika to take this uquiz for the babes, ty lovelies!! very slowly trying to catch up on tags <3

THE TRICKSTER

no legends will be written about you, but you deserve a place in them anyway. although most think of the hero, villain, or mentor archetypes, you may be even more iconic or liked. before storytellers were repeating tales of beowulf and king arthur, they were gathering around the fire listening to stories about coyote, raven, and the spider god anansi. you don't classify as necessarily good nor evil, you follow your own agenda and do whatever you need to accomplish that free of black/white morals. you probably stan antiheroes and antivillains.

THE MENTOR

you aren't really old, but some days you feel so. there are so many children, so many young adolescents. you don't want kids, but you always play with them or eek out basic decency to them. you have a skill set and know it. you used to think you were the main character, but now you're okay with settling for training one.

THE VILLAIN

you should be happy you're getting this. instead, you just nod and stare at your device blankly before clicking off to another quiz. the person who said all villains are created by villains was correct. you were innocent once. the world spit in your face, then was offended when you spit right back. your only (initial) crime was having an objective in conflict to the hero's.

— it's been forever so i'm so sorry if i missed someone, feel free to yell at me and/or use this as your tag <3 otherwise attempting to tag the usual suspects :'')

@adelaidedrubman, @lordundying, @henbased, @belorage, @poetikat

@rhettsabbott, @jacobseed, @sofrosine, @carrionsflower, @queennymeria

@chyrstis, @imogenkol, @socially-awkward-skeleton, @raresvtm, @leviiackrman

@ruvviks, @jamessunderlandgf, @playstationmademe, @risingsh0t, @a-treides

@8bitpizzacoupons, @playstationmademe, @yourlove-is-sunlight, @confidentandgood, @shallow-gravy & anyone else can @ me xx

[ct-multifandom]

I don’t usually make posts like this, but I’ve been seeing a lot of anti-intellectual junk lately, and I really think we need to put the word “pretentious” up on a shelf until people learn what it actually means.

It doesn’t describe someone who likes artsy-fartsy deep meaning media. People who are pretentious are fake. They’re posers trying to be sophisticated and unique, not like other girls. They pretend to only like stuff they think will make them sound cool when they talk about it. They want to act like they know something you don’t, and they want attention for it.

By definition, if you genuinely enjoy something, you can’t be pretentious. If it resonates with you, and you analyze it, and you don’t care what people think, that’s the polar opposite, actually. If you love obscure experimental prog music, if you watch underground high concept indie films through English teacher eyes, if you spend hours in a modern art museum reading each piece as a vessel for storytelling, if your backpack’s full of poetry books that inspire you, if you play underrated games that were someone’s passion project, if you have an interest in studying the classics or the masters, you are not pretentious.

Of course, some people just don’t like some stuff, and that’s fine, but that’s not what this is about. Don’t let anti-intellectuals shame you for enjoying things just because your interests are inaccessible to them, because they refuse to be brave and put effort into critical thinking. You’re not stuck up for refusing to overlook the craft of artists.

[mbtiblogfun]

"The INFP Archetypes"

What makes INFPs different from each other? Well there are many factors. Obviously not all INFPs are the same, and other parts of typology like enneagram, ivs, and socionics do affect this. Some INFPs are also more in tune with their weaker functions (Si and Te) than others. Like the other types, INFPs also have different "archetypes" that are often seen as "general representations" of them. Obviously because mbti is so nuanced and complex, don't fret if you don't identify with any of these! They're very simplified, so not relating doesn’t mean you're not an INFP!

So now let's get into some of the most notable archetypes

1. The Dreamer

The most notable INFP archetype, one could call it "the INFP poster child." The dreamer is a pure, innocent, curious, sensitive, and idealistic INFP. The dreamer looks at the world with wide, starry-eyes, and wears their heart on their sleeve. Usually the dreamer is also very romantic poetic, and/or artistic, and they have a wild imagination. The dreamer sees the good in everyone and might often merge with/be present in tropes like the manic pixie dream girl, or the soft boy. They have a tendency to be portrayed as mysterious or misunderstood.

Examples of the dreamer: Belle (Beauty & the Beast), Aurora (Sleeping Beauty), Amelie, Juliet (Romeo & Juliet), Anne Shirley (Anne of Green Gables), and Celine (Before Trilogy)

2. The Mediator

The mediator shares the same traits as the dreamer (pure, sensitive, kind-hearted, etc.) but plays a different role in the story. Typically the dreamers are protagonists, while mediators usually have secondary roles. The mediator often acts as a voice of reason, to keep the protagonist in touch with their humanity or to just listen whenever someone needs to let it all out. The mediator is typically very quirky and non-conformist. The mediator is empathetic and usually soften-spoken, but they're not afraid to stand up for others or what they believe in.

Examples of the mediator: Silvermist (Tinkerbell), Mantis (MCU), Luna Lovegood (Harry Potter), Ami Mizuno/Sailor Mercury (Sailor Moon), and Lucy Pevensie (Narnia)

3. The Seeker

The seeker, once again, shares the same traits as the other two but has an emphasis on curiosity and imagination. The seeker is not afraid to ponder life's deeper, more complex questions.

As said by @dragonflymage, the seeker often asks themselves questions like

Why do I exist?

Who am I really inside?

How do I fit?

Where do I belong?

They also go on to add this explanation: "A seeker, continuously looking for answers that we never may find, but that we must keep searching for anyway. "

(If you wanna read more from her post I've reblogged it on my page) While they search for these answers, the seeker oftentimes will go on a "hero's journey" in hopes of finding the answer along their quest

Examples of the seeker: Merlin (BBC), Newt Scamander (Fantastic Beasts/HP), Luke Skywalker (Star Wars), Edward Scissorhands, and Frodo (LOTR)

4. The Emotional Villain

As you can see this one is a complete 180 compared to the other three lol. This pattern doesn't exactly have a name, so I just made one up.

Pretty much all INFP villains I've seen are driven by their emotions. Afterall, Fi is our dominant function. The emotional villain is driven by personal reasons and experiences, they're not just evil for the sake of being evil. Typically the emotional villain is very moody, disturbed, and/or unstable. They are usually the direct opposite of their other INFP counterparts: they are selfish, ruthless, and blood-hungry.

Examples of the emotional villain: Wanda Maximoff (MCU), Joker (2019 ver), and Kylo Ren (Star Wars).

5. The Angsty Teen

Another really common portrayal of INFPs in media is the angsty teen. This archetype is pretty self explanatory, an angsty hormonal teenager. The angsty teen often struggles with social anxiety, and/other another mental illness. They also might have trust issues, be really moody, or hurting from unrequited love or some other trauma. The angsty teen often copes through artistic means, like poetry or painting.

I feel the feelings on this archetype are very divided. While a lot of people don't like having that image as a representation of their type, some argue that it's a realistic portrayal of the darker side of being an INFP. I personally feel like the angsty teen represents my inner conflicts, while the dreamer, mediator, and seeker represent my outward behavior most of the time. What are your thoughts?

Examples of the angsty teen: Shinji Ikari (Evangelion), Will Byers (Stranger Things), Cassie Ainsworth (Skins), Kou Mabuchi (Blue Spring Ride), Violet Parr (The Incredibles), Nico di Angelo (Percy Jackson), Charlie Kelmeckis (The Perks of Being a Wallflower), Elio Perlman (Call Me By Your Name), Todd Anderson (Dead Poets Society), Fischl (Genshin Impact), Lydia Deetz (Beetlejuice) and Cry Baby (K-12)

There's plenty more archetypes but I thought I'd just focus on these 5. Also remember that these archetypes don't represent all INFPs as a whole, they’re just like "INFPs in a nutshell."

What are your thoughts? Which archetypes do you relate to? Which one's your favorite? Which one's your least favorite?

[prokopetz]

It just occurred to me that, as riffs on the classic "wizard with mercury poisoning" trope – albeit ones which take it in very different directions – the Ice King and Patchouli Knowledge are technically channelling the same archetype.

[saintmeghanmarkle]

JAN MOIR on fire: Meghans become just another pay-per-view plugger turning her high profile into high profit by u/Von_und_zu_

JAN MOIR on fire: Meghan’s become just another pay-per-view plugger turning her high profile into high profit Between not launching her lifestyle brand, not being invited to A-list events and not visiting the UK with her husband, where does Meghan find the time to be an international businesswoman, that is what I want to know.This week, the Duchess of Sussex interrupted her trade and industry schedule to give an interview to the New York Times. How unlike her, is what you are thinking, and I agree.Meghan breached her ongoing quest for privacy, piercing that pearly shell of seclusion and confidentiality, to talk to one of the few publications in the world — along with People magazine, her trusty in-house trumpet — that she knows will treat her waffly pensées and latest commercial undertakings with respect and deference, rather than openly laugh in her face.And so it came to be.\**Meghan would not tell the newspaper how much she put into the brand, nor what ownership percentage she now has in the company, but Cesta confirmed it was a minority stake.So I am guessing that it was sixpence, a free jar of jam and a signed photograph of the Duke and Duchess being presented with their Golden Grifters of 2024 award.Why are we all here? I've lost my thread. Oh, yes — to salute Meghan's 'ability to move merchandise', a talent which was breathlessly admired by the NYT, as if the Duchess were a shiny fashion truck barrelling down the highway of hip.Which, as it turns out, is exactly how she sees herself.\**However, the exiled Duchess has had to wait until now to fully monetise that regal power and fully invest in herself — while also helping struggling fashion brands establish themselves, of course. Of course.'I support designers that I have really great friendships with, and smaller, up-and-coming brands that haven't gotten the attention that they should be getting,' she said.Unknowns such Oscar de La Renta and Givenchy, along with St Ella of McCartney and an obscure apprentice tailor from Milan called Mr G Armani, are all so grateful for her help. As, indeed, are Cesta.\**The Duchess also told the newspaper that, when it comes to being a businesswoman, she is a dolphin, not a shark.And also that she is better than you, but you knew that already.\**Like all influencers — which is what she has become — Meghan always seems to be invested in the higher purpose of self-valourising while imposing her superior taste on the scabby masses for clicks and cash.Look. Plenty of celebrities and even some royals get clothes and accessories for free — but that is not enough for the Sussexes. I imagine long Montecito nights of the soul when Meghan and Harry just burn with pure fury at the thought of anyone else, from handbag maker to napkin embroiderer to dress designer, making money out of them.So perhaps it should be no surprise to anyone that she seems to be turning herself into just another pay-per-view professional plugger, a walking billboard in a perennial marketing campaign for herself, a duchess who has transmogrified her high profile into a high profit, with a price on everything from her ethical diamond earrings to the soles of her shoes.The problem is that, collectively and individually, Harry and Meghan haven't got any actual talent to monetise — all that is left to milk is the very fact of their celebrity itself.For he is a prince who will never be crowned and she is an actress who will never get a part. And it was always, always coming to this sad point. https://ift.tt/2Yd3cUs post link: https://ift.tt/J8CvZrl author: Von_und_zu_ submitted: August 30, 2024 at 04:27AM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.

[ohmerricat]

just gotta wait 16 years, hang in there 🤞🤞

[yardsards]

the carmilla webseries (particularly s3) makes some really interesting points about amatonormativity that i think are probably accidental but still fascinate me.

like there's this intended theme of like, being so devoted to one person that you put them above everyone else, and the harms that can cause. and that theme is primarily explored through laura and carmilla's relationship, especially as a foil to the dean and her beloved. but also with lafontaine and how they kinda subvert that.

(i could write essays analyzing this, tbh)

anyway. the show primarily explores the themes of putting one person above everyone else through the lens of romantic relationships, because that's just kind of the genre they're operating under. but that (again, probably unintentionally) brings up a theme of amatonormativity. because amatonormativity expects you to have one romantic partner and to put them above everyone else, to unquestionably value them more than any of your friends.

anyway, with that background out of the way, what i'm really thinking about currently is danny in s3

there's that scene early on in the season, when danny's all evil vampire mode. and laura says that her and carmilla are "just friends". and danny threatens laura in front of carmilla and is like "surely you wouldn't mind me hurting her/would be willing to let her die to keep the talisman, if you two really are just friends"

and like, while danny is correct in her observation that laura and carmilla's feelings about each kther are clearly not platonic, her logic is absolute garbage. me and the friend i was rewatching it with were both like "??? no i absolutely WOULD still mind if someone threatened my purely platonic friend like that, you'd be a pretty garbage friend to not care". like, danny's logic in that scene is peak amatonormative nonsense.

but then. at the end of the season. it's danny's *platonic* love for kirsch that ends up connecting her back to her humanity. it's kirsch that she finally breaks free of the dean's influence to protect. kirsch that she's willing to risk it all for.

it wasn't laura, the girl she had a crush on. it was kirsch, who she had a whole thing about in the previous season about how she explicitly did NOT have any romantic towards him and 100% solely saw him as a platonic friend. it was her "just a friend" who ultimately ended up meaning everything for her.