Neil is there to protect the one who protects them all.
Andrew always knew how to protect. He sure has his own ways that many fail to understand but the bottom line stays the same.
With Neil coming into his life he gets to be something else than just the protector - which I want to talk about here.
The exy obsessed junkie who claims to only care about his own survival is the first one who sees beyond Andrews play - who sees that Andrew doesn’t take care of himself at all. Too busy keeping an eye on everyone to care about what happens to his own self. And Neil hates it furiously.
So Neil puts Andrew first.
Starting with his health. Exy is important to Neil but he knows Andrew needs to get off the drugs first. The foxes found it easier to deal with Andrew while he’s on drugs, so they didn’t put much effort into changing that - Neil though. Neil saw what the drugs did to Andrew. So they had to get rid off it as fast as possible.
So he makes a deal. He gives up a piece of a truth, gives a promise and makes him go take care of himself.
He punches Riko because he couldn’t stop himself.
He agrees to go to Evermore - he agrees to torture just to keep Andrew save.
Afterwards he refuses to back down his care after being explicitly told to. “If it means loosing you then no”.
After being brutally tortured, one of the first things he does is inspecting Andrews bruises. Inspecting Andrews bruises the same way Andrew inspects his. “All that time fighting and you never learned how to duck?”
He told the cops off when they indicated getting Andrew off him “you’ll what, asshole?”
He was there in a heartbeat the second Andrew got pushed in the final game. And only backed off after checking Andrew was really alright.
For the first time Andrew has someone who has his back the same way he had the backs of everyone else for years. Andrew is fiercely protective and for the first time he is fiercely protected too.
“You are a pipe dream.”
529 notes
·
View notes
It is incredibly isolating to navigate through fandom as an aromantic person. Aro experiences are so varied, and there is no definite aro experience that encapsulates the alienation that fandom spaces cause for certain people.
Fandom is mostly built and structured on shipping. And if not, the blorbofication of characters, which tends to go down the shipping pipeline; where does that leave the romance repulsed aro person who genuinely does not want to see any form of shipping? Platonic dynamics, right?
Yeah, sure. But by platonic dynamics, it's only "best friends" or "family" right? Where does that leave the aro folks with undefined labels? No, qprs aren't a get-out-of-jail card.
And qprs- they have no rules or standards set upon them by society, not even having a clear definition for what it is, because not all qprs are the same. Yet, for some reason, it ended up becoming the "nonbinary" option to a lot of people- not romantic or "regular" platonic? Qpr it is, right?
But where does that leave the aro folk who don't want a qpr? Who don't wish to see characters depicted in pairs or trios or so forth- who embrace the lack of a partner?
And these concepts presented; when aro folk talk about them, do you care? And if you do, do you understand? Do you try to?
If you aren't aro, but wish to be supportive, are you a genuine ally? Do you raise the concerns of aro folk you share the space with?
Or do you take a look at these concepts- and decide you understand them "well" enough? Do you decide to speak for aro folks instead?
Do you depict relationships outside of romance because you believe in the importance of platonic relationships? Will you accept the fact that not all platonic interactions will be familial or "best friends"?
Can you accept depictions of qprs outside of "more than friends, less than lovers"? Are you willing to accept it is not just "best friends" or "romance lite"? Will you accept that nothing is inherently romantic- and characters in a qpr may fall under your standards of lovers?
Can you resist the urge to put every character in a pair or trio or group? Are you comfortable with the notion of characters finding more joy in being by themselves, outside of all those lenses you see them in?
It's good if you can.
And if you can't, at the very least, do you understand why some aro folk in your space are upset? Embittered by your favorite ships? Starving for representation?
Did you depict these characters with these concepts with the knowledge that aromanticism is fluid?
83 notes
·
View notes
I met people I knew only online for the first time irl last night and I'm still extremely exhausted cause I am not a social person so here. Take an OC.
Katale (Kitty) is wonderful and I love her and she's a criminal and that's fine. She likes to look cute and so whenever I see a really cute outfit in public with a specific vibe, I'm like "Kitty would love that". So here. Please. Please know that I saw this very pretty woman jogging with her hair pulled back, running shorts, and the CUTEST top with a little scarf from the same fabric tied and wow. It was. So wonderful, please have a wonderful day @ the lady I saw jogging yesterday.
52 notes
·
View notes
detective comics #509
[ID: Bruce Wayne sleeping in his penthouse, his eyes squeezed shut as the narration reads, ‘Gordon's strained laugh sounds hollow, but it echos in the Batman's mind... and haunts his dreams...” Bruce awakens to a hand on his shoulder and before he can think, he's twisting it and holding it down. The panel expands, revealing the hand belongs to Alfred as he's almost toppling over! He cries out, “M-master Bruce—my arm!” as Bruce groggily realizes who it is. He lets go at once as Alfred moves to the end of the bed and holds his arm while stammering an apology, “S-sorry, s-sir... Sorry if I startled you.” Bruce looks at him with aghast as he cries out, “My god, Alfred—I almost broke your arm!” Alfred reasons, “You must have been having a nightmare, sir.” as Bruce sits up and puts his face in his hands. He weepily dismisses, “A nightmare—what kind of an excuse is that? Old friend... forgive me...” Alfred reassures, “Nothing to forgive, sir. Just bad nerves, sir.” END ID]
32 notes
·
View notes
In talking about Chaucer (p. 74), I said that, in general, puns and verbal connections of sound were unimportant and not to be sought out; and now, you will say, I have been using them to explain cruces in Shakespeare. Alas, you have touched on a sore point; this is one of the less reputable aspects of our national poet.
A quibble is to Shakespeare [Johnson could not but confess] what luminous vapours are to the traveller; he follows it at all adventures; it is sure to lead him out of his way and sure to engulf him in the mire. It has some malignant power over his mind.... A quibble was for him the fatal Cleopatra for whom he lost the world, and was content to lose it.
Nor can I hold out against the Doctor, beyond saying that life ran very high in those days, and that he does not seem to have lost the world so completely after all. It shows lack of decision and will-power, a feminine pleasure in yielding to the mesmerism of language, in getting one's way, if at all, by deceit and flattery, for a poet to be so fearfully susceptible to puns. Many of us could wish the Bard had been more manly in his literary habits, and I am afraid the Sitwells are just as bad.
William Empson, 7 Types of Ambiguity, ch 2 pp 100-101
i'm sorry this is so fucking funny. that pathetic loser shakespeare who loved puns so much it cost him everything, except of course his status as the most famous, most read, most immortal english-language author of all time. but everything else, he lost and it's all because of how weak he was to resist a pun :/ pouring one out for my sad little girly man who could have had it all if only he was better at writing, the thing he is the most famous guy in the world for.
even empson, who disagrees with johnson that shakespeare "lost the world", is like, too bad our favorite poet is susceptible to the thing that made him famous :/ really tragic that the guy whose wordplay we've been talking about for 300 years likes wordplay :///
also i can't get over writing a book about the types of ambiguity and NOT INCLUDING PUNS?? sorry but puns are ambiguous! that's where their juice comes from! imagine liking ambiguity so much you write a book about it but never mention puns except to dunk on them. imagine being a POET and POETRY CRITIC who looks down on sound-based ambiguity! could not be me!!
12 notes
·
View notes