#notion is superior

[chronicsstudyblr]

This week I’m home alone, which means I can gather myself in peace.

A list of things I plan on doing:

Make a good routine for staying on top of school

Clean room, and figure out how to keep it tidy

Make morning and evening routines

Make a self-care routine

Set up my Notion-page

Finish “Asking for It” by Louise O’Neill

Prepare for job interview + nail the job interview and get the job

Sign up for a few of the student clubs at my school (theatre, debate team, m.u.n)

Sort through and fix some of my clothes

Make a mushroom-soup

[system-architect]

i desperately wish gw2 had more food-centric lore. i think about asura food more than is probably particularly reasonable. they're sort of implied to like molecular gastronomy in the lvl500 chef quests which is fitting and makes sense, but surely not every asura is eating bespoke Pea Spheres day in and day out right? i think my favorite angle on them is a sort of 50s-80s american-esque food style where there's a huge emphasis on things being Convenient and Scientific, so you'd get a lot of absolute slop tv dinners and canned items that have labels boasting how they were nutritionally fortified and contained your day's complete vitamin intakes and so on. a lot of jellied things. i do also fully believe they would have + eat soylent.

[fairydares]

The other thing with Gruvia is that a lot of the people who hate it really just don't like the "yandere" archetype/dynamic. Which is fine and tbh gruvia is an exception for me because I've always hated yandere characters in everything else (plus her yandere aspects are admittedly what I like least about her) but it's sort of weird to see these posts that are like "No you know what FUCK gruvia because *literal perfect description of the exact archetype Mashima was going for with this character*"

[flintstill]

Also, last week someone started to tell me it was anti-feminist to not want to date someone I wasn’t attracted to or couldn’t become attracted to.

They backed off the statement after I called bullshit and chewed them out for that and their taking that statement as if attraction is the only factor—which was extremely fucking insulting to my character because OBVIOUSLY it is NOT, they have to be up to snuff as a person—that goes without saying. And also how tf is the implication that women should settle and be with men they’re not attracted to feminist or egalitarian?

I asked them if they were demi or grey ace and they ended up saying yeah. OK COOL. IM FUCKING ALLO AND I DIDNT CHOOSE IT. Your experience being valid does not make it better or worse (or applicable to) mine.

[caladblog]

it is 9pm on a saturday and you are running a slight fever. do you:

☐ make some tea and go to sleep early

☐ reread / rewatch / replay something cozy, comforting, and chill

☑ binge the entirety of AMC's The Terror (2018) based on nothing but an overfamiliarity with polar travel and secondhand vibes you've picked up from tumblr

[mashpotatoe]

im a white jew, i was born in israel,

ive lived there all my life and was brought up in an environment that fosters racism driven by nationalism, nationalism driven by racism.

in israel, they teach you jews and muslims (though usually, they just say arabs) have always been enemies, the same way the US deems the entire middle east as a inherent war zone, ridding them of the responsibility for perpetuating war in thst region.

they tell you "were the fair and humane side who strives for peace! its the arabs who never accept the offer!"

i remember the first time i began doubting that sentiment was in fourth grade, when we were having a discussion in class about the character of Saul from the Torah. the teacher was talking about how Saul, the first monarch of the Kingdom of Israel, used to fight the Philistines, and when she added that the Philistines were the natural enemy of the Israelites, she asked the class what group of people is their modern equivalent to which everyone very eagerly replied "Arabs!" and nevermind that there in that same class sat two arab boys, one of whom sat next to me, who i looked at and thought "but he isnt my enemy? hes just a boy in my class."

they teach you to hate arabs. sometimes they say it outright. sometimes they say it more carefully, or make a distinction between good and bad arabs, those who are with us and those who are against us.

in a state based on the idea of (white) jewish supremacy, they teach you jews are naturally superior. they use the conspiratorial narrative of "jews controlling the world" to their favor, giving their own watered down explanation for why antisemitism exists, saying that it must be driven by jealousy.

the zionist movement always used antisemitism to its advantage, either for reinforcing the notion of jewish supremacy or appealing to the real pain and trauma of generations, people who survived the holocaust, connecting them to stolen land where they are "guaranteed" safety ergo granting "justification" for the suffering of others.

its using peoples real pain that makes fear mongering so effective, and when the israeli population grows up being told all of their neighboring countries want to kill them, they quickly get defensive of the "only land where they can feel safe", but the only explanation ever provided for Why these neighboring countries are considered enemies is because theyre arabs.

and when it comes to palestine, it isnt even recognized as a country, nor identity. just a threat. ive talked to many people who are genuinely unaware of the occupation, and they arent willing to believe it either, because the media narrative has successfully shifted the blame on hamas. because "how could it be us? we want peace! its the terrorists who make us look bad! and their children, they grow up to be antisemites*, might as well get rid of them too!" they never stop to think what environment these children must grow up in to develop these "radical" ideas.

* what they mean by antisemite is really just antizionist, but the term anti/zionist isnt practiced in local dialect, being a zionist is treated as a given

any jew who stands against israels oppression is dubbed a self hating jew, but the biggest contributors to antisemitism is the people in charge of an ethnostate, because at any moment they could decide who is not white enough to be jewish, who is too jewish to be white, who stood against the current coalition government and who is an obedient dog.

israelis arent a monolith, but many of them have been won over, convinced its an "us v them" situation, when in reality it could never be the "us" that "loses"

the israeli government was waiting for an event like the massacre on the seventh of october to declare war, to have the so called "right to defend itself", so they could initiate the final steps of an ethnic genocide and displace, if not kill, all remaining palestinians. under the guise of bringing peace.

it isnt too late to call for a permanent ceasefire, to end the occupation.

please contact your representatives, attend protests and rallies if you are able. palestine will be free, and the flowers will rise again.

[jinxie-117]

this is what i mean when people say they have a problem with the second half of the secret history. so many ppl can’t stand that bunny is dead now and refuse to accept the fact that the book is actually about how these people react to this guys murder, not about who actually pushed him.

“theres no plot” YOU ARE LYING IN WAIT TO SEE IF THEY GET CAUGHT FOR KILLING THEIR BEST FRIEND. YOU ARE WATCHING THEM ALL COPE WITH THE FACT THEY ARE MURDERERS NOW. THAT IS THE PLOT. COPE HARDER

[beesmygod]

i hate talking about this stuff any more because its become a cynical and performative act, but its sincerely vexing and nauseating seeing self-proclaimed liberals/"leftists" immediately start getting mealy-mouthed about ensuring that trans lives can be lived with dignity and comfort. "oh its just a small percentage of the population, we can't bring democracy to a halt over- " we can and we should, because any system that uses and views a segment of its population like kindling deserves to be abandoned. im unwilling to make concessions or bargain with unapologetic evil; i will always have more in common with my trans sisters, brothers, and everyone outside/comprising the entirety of the gender spectrum than anyone who turns into a simpering, weak-willed idiot in the face of adversity.

there is no dignity or freedom in a world that argues, seriously and without any irony, that any one gender is superior to the other based on "inherent" characteristics shown time and time again to be mutable/based on preconceived notions. the idea of going to bat for that belief system should be nauseating to any person with a pulse and a brain. fuck this stupid earth, everyone deserves a comfortable, dignified life because it's the only one we get. its that simple.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Words You Always Have to Look Up

Nonplussed

Means “perplexed.”

But there is a further point of confusion that can send someone to the dictionary: since the mid-20th century, nonplussed has been increasingly used to mean “unimpressed” or “unsurprised,” and this use, though often considered an error, has made the confident deployment of this word a fraught issue for many.

Anodyne

Sometimes words sort of seem to telegraph their meaning: pernicious sounds like a bad thing rather than a good thing, and beatific sounds like something to be desired as opposed to something to be avoided.

This is all fairly subjective, of course, but the sounds of words can have an effect on how we perceive them.

Anodyne doesn’t give us many clues in that way. It turns out that anodyne is a good thing: it means “serving to alleviate pain” or “innocuous,” from the Greek word with similar meanings.

Supercilious

Used to describe people who are arrogant and haughty or give off a superior attitude.

It comes from the Latin word meaning “eyebrow,” and was used in Latin to refer to the expression of arrogant people, and this meaning was transferred to English.

Amusingly, the word supercilious was added to some dictionaries in the 1600s—a time when many Latin words were translated literally into English—with the meanings “pertaining to the eyebrows” or “having great eyebrows.”

Stochastic

In scientific and technical uses, it usually means “involving probability” or “determined by probability,” and is frequently paired with words like demand, model, processing, and volatility.

Comes from the Greek word meaning “skillful at aiming,” which had become a metaphor for “guessing.”

It’s a term that had long been used by mathematicians and statisticians, and has come into more public discourse with stochastic terrorism, the notion that accusations or condemnations of a person or group can lead to violence against that person or group. This allows those who make the initial accusations to seem innocent from any specific violent act, but stochastic terrorism is a way to identify the motives for such an attack as being set in motion by the words of another person.

Anathema

Means “something or someone that is strongly disliked”.

Initially used to refer to a person who had been excommunicated from the Catholic church.

Came from Greek through Latin into English with the meaning of “curse” or “thing devoted to evil,” but today refers to anything that is disapproved of or to be avoided.

There is a strangeness about the way this word is used in a sentence. Because anathema is usually used without an or the, as in “raincoats are anathema to high fashion” or “those ideas are anathema in this class” it may seem just odd enough to send people to the dictionary when they encounter it.

Bemused

So close in sound to amused that they have blended together in usage, but they started as very different ideas: bemused originally meant “confused” or “bewildered,” a meaning stemming from the idea of musing or thinking carefully about something, which may be required in order to assess what isn’t easy to understand.

Many people insist that “confused” is still the only correct way to use bemused, but the joining of meanings with amused has resulted in the frequent use of this word to mean “showing wry or tolerant amusement,” a shade of meaning created from the combination.

Words with meanings that seem to crisscross or intersect are sure to send us to the dictionary.

Solipsistic

Means “extremely egocentric” or “self-referential.”

Comes from the Latin roots solus ("alone," the root of sole) and ipse ("self").

As this Latinate fanciness implies, this is a word used in philosophical treatises and debates.

The egocentrism of solipsism has to do with the knowledge of the self, or more particularly the theory in philosophy that your own existence is the only thing that is real or that can be known.

Calling an idea or a person solipsistic can be an insult that identifies a very limited and usually self-serving perspective, or it can be a way to isolate one’s perspective in a useful way.

It’s a word with an abstract meaning, which is a good reason to check that meaning from time to time.

Tautology

A needless or meaningless repetition of words or ideas.

It’s a word about words that can be used in academic writing or as a hifalutin way of saying “redundancy,” as in “a beginner who just started learning.”

Since we value both clarity and originality, especially in writing, tautology is a word that usually carries a negative connotation and is used as a way to criticize a poorly formed sentence or a poorly argued position.

Perspicacious

The ability to see clearly is a powerful metaphor for being able to understand something.

Being perspicacious means having an ability to notice and understand things that are difficult or not obvious, and it comes from the Latin verb meaning “to see through.”

Means “perceptive,” and is often used along with words that have positive connotations like witty, clever, wise, alert, and insightful (another word that uses seeing as a metaphor for understanding).

Peripatetic

Means “going from place to place,” and comes from the Greek word that means “to walk.”

You can say someone who moves frequently has a “peripatetic existence,” or someone who has changed careers several times has had a “peripatetic professional trajectory.”

The root word “to walk” is usually more of a metaphor in the modern use of this word—it means frequent changes of place, yes, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that you are wearing out your shoes.

The original use of this word did use “walking” as a more literal image, however: it was a description of the way that the philosopher Aristotle preferred to give lectures to his students while walking back and forth, and the word has subsequently taken on a more metaphorical meaning.

Source ⚜ More: Writing Basics ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[drdemonprince]

"I think if we are going to be able to move forward in this fight, trans men must abandon the notion that other men are fundamentally the “bad” gender — and that we don’t belong to that category because of our transness. We must embrace manhood as a state of both strength and profound lostness, an immense liability as much as it is a source of gender euphoric joy, and see the frustrated wanderings of other marginalized masculine people as of a piece with our own."

Trans men need to accept that they are men.

That means not viewing themselves as superior or separate from other men. Like all other men they have the capacity for great tenderness as well as great violence, they are privileged and that privilege is precarious, and all men are their brothers and comrades in the fight against restrictive masculine norms.

They should also accept that lots of women and other gender minorities are gonna hate them for being men, and have reason to mistrust men.

I'm getting very sick of this elaborative performative confusion when the uniting principle for everything I say is simply that trans men actually are men.

[julietcpulet]

Jinmao and Power Dynamics

I’ve seen this debated a lot and have put my thoughts on it here and there but wanted to do kind of a master post on it. I'm only really focusing on the anime because while I know future details from the LN it's a lot to include and I think most of this back and forth centers on the way people see them currently in the anime.

There’s this general consensus that because we know Jinshi has more overall status and power in the world of Apothecary Diaries, MaoMao is automatically at the disadvantage. I’d say that notion isn’t true at all. While our modern idea is wanting to view everything through a lens of “power = bad” and the person who has it must want to use it to hurt others, we need to consider that it’s the person who determines what having power means. And if they chose to use it for the betterment of others then it’s not always a bad thing to have it in that case. Power can be given by someone who’s in the position to give it too. Jinshi may hold the power but he willingly lets it go just as often. MaoMao may not have much actual status but her superior intellect usually puts her in the power position over others as she understands more than they do.

How this works out for their relationship is easy to see. While Jinshi is quickly seen to be the one who has the greater status, he never uses it to coerce or make MaoMao do what he wants. If anything she rarely does things in the way anyone imagined and he uses his position to protect her where her own behavior might’ve gotten her into trouble overstepping.

People have mentioned that MaoMao cannot go against Jinshi now because he owns her as a servant, having bought her from the Verdigirs House. I think we’re forgetting that MaoMao agreed Jinshi taking her from there was her best option. Remember that Jinshi actually thought he was honoring her wishes in letting her go from the palace. MaoMao is the one who stupidly got herself fired thinking she couldn’t be honest with Jinshi and needed to play mental gymnastics, only to regret it. It was only when she owned up that it wasn’t what she wanted and they had a miscommunication that he again tried to find a way to help her in the best way he could, by buying her back and bringing her in as his servant. He then proceeds to never actually treat her as a servant. Instead he lets her go back to functioning almost as if nothing has changed.

Although MaoMao talks about that official / servant relationship in her head, we see she goes against it all the time. She bickers with him, she challenges his assumptions and also, he allows it. In this way it’s clear that while on the surface Jinshi has all the power, he in essence hands it to MaoMao and she feels safe to engage in this mutual back and forth with him. If anything, MaoMao is often the more “powerful” one in their dynamic as she can be rude to Jinshi, ignore him and objectify him in ways we don't see him do with her. Jinshi on the other hand is careful towards her, if occasionally teasing and hesitant to go beyond what he perceives as a limit. 

For instance, he asks MaoMao before he touches her at the Verdigris House and doesn’t pester her for additional affection. When he holds her otherwise it’s almost out of necessity like when she’s injured after saving him and again when she falls after he startles her from the dance. The times when he's perceived to go beyond boundaries are usually moments when they're bantering, there's a vulnerability on either side or MaoMao is being dense and Jinshi is one of the few willing to challenge her. Examples can be like the scene where he holds onto her after she falls from the wall and him "checking" MaoMao with the head butt after she's somewhat unknowingly flirty trying to get the ox bezoar. She has sympathy on him when she sees he's upset in the first instance and in the second is only frustrated about her bezoar but doesn't think twice about Jinshi's actions, to her what they're doing is normal for them.

Jinshi is one of the few people MaoMao allows to push her on her lack of awareness related to others emotions. By persisting he's actually brought her closer to being able to relate to him and others, not just because she has to but because she might want to. And while it'll seem like a misuse of power to do these things at times, for someone like MaoMao who struggles to understand and express emotion, him using this "leverage" so to speak may be the best thing he can do for her.

This power imbalance question has come up a lot with the frog scene. I see it this way, Jinshi's the one initially uncomfortable but MaoMao persists and he doesn’t roll her off or dismiss her. He gently sets her down and tries to speak to her. It’s MaoMao who sets off their bickering. And even when Jinshi lays her down, he’s cautious and careful with her. If she felt like she were in danger in that cave there were ways to back out and she knew that. But that’s what says to me she knew there was no real threat in that moment. Were she and Jinshi overheated and pushed past their limit? Probably. Was Jinshi using his status to take things too far? Absolutely not. He was being a bit childish in the moment maybe but even MaoMao admits she provoked him and he was doing what he always does, reading MaoMao to see what is acceptable. And when she doesn’t move or object he doesn’t stop right away. He’s always listened to her when she’s been uncomfortable. I’ve done an analysis already on why I don’t think MaoMao fully objected to being in the position she was in in the cave but it certainly wasn’t due to power dynamics.

We’ve seen times before that when MaoMao truly felt cornered she could be frightening. During the whole Lakan plot when they ended up in the pleasure district and Jinshi asked her that displeasing question, he knew immediately she wasn’t happy with what he’d asked. He tries to diffuse the situation but she shakes him off and walks away. Then later when he approaches her about meeting "that weirdo" she turns on Jinshi with the look he said he would “never want to see again”. So it’s been made clear that MaoMao can make her feelings known if she wants to and Jinshi takes notice.

She and Jinshi goad each other and go back and forth all the time in a way that breaks the boundaries between their stations. If MaoMao truly cared about not angering him she’d always be submissive but she knows she can tease him because he won’t hurt her. Will they sometimes go to far? Probably, they are only 19 and 18 at this point and two people who’ve been raised with emotional issues they have to work through. But the point is that they’re working it out. 

We’re so used to taking power dynamics at face value, if one has the higher status then we assume they’re going to use it to harm or manipulate the other one. But with Jinmao that simply isn’t the case. Jinshi may have the upper hand on the outside but he submits to MaoMao easily every time. He gives her control because he wants to even though he doesn’t have to. That’s what it means to have real power, knowing you can take over the situation but not always doing it out of the best interest for the other person. He helps MaoMao and is good to her by using his better status often to her advantage.

In the end it’s been proven in a multitude of ways that MaoMao trusts Jinshi and while both push each other’s limits, they know the other’s core character. So no, I don’t think power dynamics are a problem in their growing relationship. The only reason it causes them trouble is because of outside forces who impose the societal norms both Jinshi and MaoMao have no problem breaking. All in all it’s just a fictional couple and analysis for fun but I think sometimes modern sentiments have got us too fixated on this idea of making everything too black vs white, men vs women when Apothecary Diaries has been shown to give its characters a lot of nuance, realistically so almost. Anywho, thank you for coming to my TED talk 😂

[despazito]

Where did this notion platonic relationships are like intellectually superior and more complex than romantic relationships bc I'm tired of hearing about it

[bimboficationblues]

A judge was a subclass of attorney believed by many to be endowed with mystical powers of interpretation. In early modern Europe, judges drew their power and authority from powdered wigs, but vulnerability to being snatched led judges in the modern era to instead harness their energy from intangible supranatural concepts such as "legal reasoning." [1] This force was largely used to undermine democracy [2], deny welfare to the disabled, antagonize vulnerable criminal defendants, personally enrich themselves [3], and conduct cryomancy rituals [citation needed]. Judges were understood contemporaneously to be the living incarnation of a certain form of legal spirit.

Judges presided over "courtrooms," which were localized fiefdoms in which the judge could purportedly use their will to manipulate the underlying fabric of reality. [4] Contemporary historians [who?] have suggested that judges required and demanded titles such as "Your Honor" in order to psychologically preserve their belief in their own righteousness and superiority despite being part of a brutal state bureaucracy that hinged entirely on arbitrary notions of logic, impartiality, and objectivity. Others have disputed this, however, and argued that the invocation of the honorific reflected the judge's status as a modern-day aristocrat. [5] Many judges wielded a gavel, a weapon which they could withdraw from a pocket dimension within their robes known as "hammerspace," in order to bludgeon reality into a shape of their choosing. Judges were typically appointed for life, but this limitation could often be circumvented through transformation into a lich. Most famously, Clarence Thomas underwent this process in 2040 in order to be appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

All judges were destroyed and immolated following the Red Annihilation Wave of 2176, which rendered the concept of "law" logically impossible.

[mikkeneko]

a lot of people --even people who are not themselves actively religious -- have a lot of very skewed ideas about what animals are and what they aren't that, at their heart, are rooted in the concept that animals are better than humans because they do not sin.

the idea that animals are better than people because they are "innocent," because they are "pure," is based in the notion that being a human specifically makes you not these things. that's original sin, rebranded. the idea that animals have "wisdom" because they are not "burdened" with intelligence and self-awareness -- that's original sin, rebranded. the idea that animals are closer to "nature and truth" (that's god, rebranded.) all descend from this particular quirk of christian philosophy.

We NEED to reevaluate how we view people with "red flags" that don't actually indicate harm to anyone. Things like "doesn't like animals," "doesn't have pets," "my pets immediately distrust them, so that means they're Secretly Evil."

I have a psychotic disorder. I suffer from flat affect. I have zero control over how I am emoting, and very often my emotional readout is completely blank. A LOT of animals (dogs especially) have exhibited aggression and fear around me ever since this started. (There are only TWO dogs I've met in the last five years that didn't BITE ME.) Dogs are unsettled by me because of a symptom of my psychosis--a condition that is out of my control that IS NOT DANGEROUS and doesn't harm anyone.

I also have a severe autoimmune disease and severe allergies to basically all animals. Whenever I tell people I can't come over because they have pets, or I don't have/want pets of my own, the IMMEDIATE response I always get is "why don't you like animals?" So I'm always pretty pissed off when I have to say, "I'm severely allergic. Don't fucking assume I have an undesireable quality just because I'm not a pet owner."

Another ableist red flag we need to talk about is "has no other friends/all their friends break up with them." Hi. I'm physically disabled with a digestive disease and a degenerative disease in my spine. That means my dietary restrictions are stupid and I can't sit/stand/walk for more than 15 minutes without being in pain. Most of the friends I break up with, I do so BECAUSE THEY ARE INCREDIBLY ABLEIST TO ME with no visible potential of changing. From people relentlessly harrassing me about lifestyle changes to not accepting correction or feedback when I tell them "hey, you CAN'T do x because it triggers y condition." If they argue or blow me off, I'm not their fucking friend!

Tl;dr: Disabled, chronically ill, and people with "scary" mental illnesses are often lumped in with "bad people" for characteristics that hurt no one and aren't in their control. Stop using "my dog is uncomfortable around them" as a litmus test for everyone you hang out with.

[thatscarletflycatcher]

The year is 1848. You are Anne Brontë, and you have written a cautionary tale for young women about the dangers of marriage and how you cannot reform a rake, and that the notion that "women's gentle influence" can do anything towards fixing corrupted and vicious men is a perverse lie. To get this point across you insert a conversation between two characters close to the beginning of the novel where you logically argue "You would have us encourage our sons to prove all things by their own experience, while our daughters must not even profit by the experience of others." and then you illustrate your point through how, despite loving her aunt dearly, your main character cannot understand the extent of the danger she's in because her aunt will only allude to it in vagueries. Surely nothing can be clearer and more forcibly expressed, right?

Reviewer at Sharpe's London Magazine:

"we cannot but express our deep regret that a book in many respects eminently calculated to advance the cause of religion and right feeling, the moral of which is unimpeachable and most powerfully wrought out, should be rendered unfit for the perusal of the very class of persons to whom it would be most useful, (namely, imaginative girls likely to risk their happiness on the forlorn hope of marrying and reforming a captivating rake), owing to the profane expressions, inconceivably coarse language, and revolting scenes and descriptions by which its pages are disfigured."

(now you can better understand the tone of the preface to the second edition)

Bonus:

"we consider the evils which render the work unfit for perusal (for we go that length in regard to it,) to arise from a perverted taste and an absence of mental refinement in the writer, together with a total ignorance of the usages of good society... despite reports to the contrary, we will not believe any woman could have written such a work... at the first glance we should say, none but a man could have known so intimately each vile, dark fold of the civilized brute's corrupted nature; none but a man could make so daring an exhibition as this book presents to us. On the other hand, no man, we should imagine, would have written a work in which all the women, even the worst, are so far superior in every quality, moral and intellectual, to all the men; no man would have made his sex appear at once coarse, brutal, and contemptibly weak, at once disgusting and ridiculous. There are, besides, a thousand trifles which indicate a woman's mind, and several more important things which show a woman's peculiar virtues. Still there is a bold coarseness, a reckless freedom of language, and an apparent familiarity with the sayings and doings of the worst style of fast men, in their worst moments, which would induce us to believe it impossible that a woman could have written it. A possible solution of the enigma is, that it may be the production of an authoress assisted by her husband, or some other male friend: if this be not the case, we would rather decide on the whole, that it is a man's writing."

We love a person who can read a book about how women, even high class women, do not and cannot escape horrifying scenes of abuse and degradation by men in Victorian society, and are, because of their special legal and economic vulnerability, most often the target of it, and go "this couldn't have possibly been written by a woman because ladies cannot have any experience whatsoever of such things."

[aventurineswife]

‘Cause I'm a jealous, jealous, jealous boy | Part 1

Synopsis: How do they react when someone flirts with their significant other?

Tags: Jealousy, Possessive Behavior, Protective, Flirting, Dark Undertones, Romantic Tension

Warnings: Mild possessiveness, subtle manipulation, slight intimidation, jealousy, dark themes, possible emotional manipulation

(Part 2)

Sunday

Sunday's golden eyes narrowed slightly as he noticed the unwanted attention being directed at you. He observed for a moment, his dignified demeanor never faltering. However, the subtle tightening of his jaw betrayed a deeper emotion simmering beneath the surface.

With graceful steps, he approached, his halo casting a faint glow behind his head as he effortlessly inserted himself into the conversation. His hand rested lightly on your shoulder, fingers cold yet reassuring. "I see you’ve caught the attention of someone who doesn't understand boundaries," he said, voice dripping with a twisted kindness. The flirtatious individual faltered under his gaze, the intensity of his golden eyes—sharp and knowing—dismantling any sense of power they might have held.

"Allow me to guide you somewhere... more peaceful." Sunday murmured to you, leading you away. His grip, though gentle, carried an unmistakable possessiveness. His twisted desire to shield you from discomfort played out in his actions—control, protection, and escape from the harshness of such interactions.

Yet behind the composed facade, there was a flicker of possessive jealousy—he would never admit it openly, but the notion of anyone causing you discomfort stirred a dark satisfaction in ensuring they never approached you again.

Dr. Veritas Ratio

Dr. Ratio’s gaze flickered toward the scene, noting the discomfort painted across your features as the unwanted attention continued. His lips curled into a smirk, an amused scoff escaping him as he closed the distance between you and the offender. The sheer confidence in his posture made his presence impossible to ignore.

"You seem... intellectually challenged," Ratio remarked bluntly to the flirt, his eyes gleaming with a mixture of amusement and condescension. "You see, my partner isn’t interested in primitive gestures of attraction. They prefer stimulating conversation, something you appear incapable of providing."

He wrapped an arm around your waist, pulling you close with an air of smug satisfaction. "Allow me to demonstrate what true compatibility looks like." His words, though cutting toward the flirt, were meant to reassure you. Ratio didn't bother hiding the possessive undercurrent in his tone.

In his mind, you were already his equal, intellectually and emotionally, and there was no room for such trivial distractions. His jealousy manifested not in anger, but in a pointed display of superiority, ensuring no one would dare challenge his place beside you.

Aventurine

Aventurine watches the flirtation unfold from across the room, his smile still present but with a hint of something darker behind it. His magenta and cyan eyes flicker with amusement, though his gaze lingers on your discomfort for a moment too long. Slowly, he saunters over, his every step deliberate, like a high-stakes poker player revealing a winning hand.

“My, my,” he begins, slipping an arm around your waist as he pulls you close. The flirt freezes under his penetrating stare. “It seems you’ve miscalculated,” he says, his tone smooth as velvet, yet there's a razor-sharp edge beneath the surface. “You see, this one belongs to me.”

Aventurine lets the words hang, watching the flirter with a grin that doesn’t reach his eyes. His fingers play absentmindedly with one of his golden rings, the subtle gesture adding to the tension. “And I don’t share my investments.”

The flirter takes a step back, realizing they’ve lost this particular gamble, and mutters an apology before disappearing. Aventurine chuckles softly, turning to you with a playful smirk.

“Honestly, darling,” he says, adjusting the collar of his overcoat, “the nerve of some people, thinking they can play a hand they’ve already lost.” His eyes gleam mischievously as he leans in closer, whispering, “Don’t worry, I’ve got you covered. No one dares touch what’s mine.”

There’s a flicker of possessiveness in his tone, subtle but unmistakable, as though you were a precious prize he wouldn’t let anyone else even attempt to claim. Though his demeanor is playful, you sense the jealousy simmering beneath his charm, a silent reminder that in Aventurine’s world, risks are calculated, and he never gambles on what he’s already won.

(If this gets 10 likes/hearts, I'll post a suggestive fic of Sunday and Part 2 of this 🤭)