Is gay marriage legal in Sumeru? Would you face any issues with the Academiya for dating or marrying a man?
Sumeru is a nation focused almost entirely on the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. As such, it is well within our interests as a nation to reject nonsensical traditional views and policies. Especially now, with the corrupt sages removed from power, that has been realized in its entirety. Akademiya is expanding to the desert, healthcare is free, artistic expression is encouraged. Even then, all of the previously existing stereotypes and biases have stemmed from academic disparities, misconceptions, and influence from the people in power—rather than mass discrimination for sexuality or gender, like some other nations might face. This is not to say that some people don’t experience those biases on an individual level—they just aren’t systemic. The discrimination against desert dwellers, on the other hand, are an entirely different issue, and will likely take years to deconstruct.
In terms of gay marriage, I cannot recall such a preventative law existing in the time that I’ve been General Mahamatra, but if it had, I have no doubt that either Lesser Lord Kusanali or Alhaitham himself would have eradicated it from our legislature by now. You are free to marry who you want in Sumeru.
29 notes
·
View notes
Thinking about the Bronev family again, I hope this is coherent-
(Cw non graphic mentions of child death, Azran Legacy spoilers ahead)
Leon Bronev, a man who was likely once a good ordinary man gets kidnapped along with his wife, leaving behind their two young children because he’d found something big about the Azran (did that make it his fault? Did he blame himself?). He loses his wife while there (I’m partial to the headcanon that it wasn’t just a normal sickness) and endures who knows what other hells while stuck in that cult for decades, ending up with nothing left but the Azran.
He turns down darker and darker paths going on some twisted version of a sunk cost fallacy (he’s gone this far already, why not go further?) until he either knowingly or unknowingly orders the murder of his granddaughter and daughter in law. Then he does it, he completes his goal, he solves the last puzzle of the Azran only for all of it to have been for nothing. Then he dies for it, but is revived with the rest and thus being unable to pay with his life. He’s arrested, likely too old at this point to hold out any hope of making amends or fixing what he’s done.
Hershel Bronev, still a young child when his parents are stolen from him and he’s left with caring for his younger brother. Then they get news that he’s going to be adopted alone, that he’d have to leave Theodore behind. Instead of that, he gives up this better life and his name, giving it all to his little brother who he wouldn’t see again for decades. He becomes Desmond Sycamore
He grows up devouring his father’s archeology books, to find a way to get some kind of revenge on the ones who stole his family from him. Instead he finds peace, he finds a new family, people who love him and people he loves the same. But it doesn’t last. Targent comes again to steal his family away, this time with his own Father at the head. Desmond Sycamore dies and he becomes Jean Descole.
But despite now loathing Targent, hating his father, he follows in their footsteps. Threatening loved ones, manipulating people, even attempting to kill a child (Luke was only 10 the first time Descole had tried to kill him), all so he could be the one to uncover the Azran. He becomes like his father in more than just appearance, but does he even realise this?
He’s put on many different faces before, but he pulls Desmond from his grave to use as a mask for what should be his final trick. He meets his brother again, but he’s the only one who knows it. Throughout their journey, he almost finds that peace again, but he knows it won’t last, he won’t be tricked again. He goes forth with his plan, revealing himself attempting to claim the sanctuary for himself.
But then he jumps in front of a laser for Luke, sacrificing himself for the boy he’d attempted to kill on more than one occasion (Maybe Desmond Sycamore still existed somewhere inside him…) On what would be his deathbed, he tells his rival of their connection, of them being blood. Then they leave to confront Bronev, he should have died but he couldn’t, not yet. He drags himself to final chamber, dying and being revived with the rest of them before disappearing, leaving loose ends untied. Now Descole has no reason to exist either. Who is he?
Then There’s Theodore Bronev, but that wasn’t his name anymore. He was given his brothers first name, given his new parents’ last name, he was Hershel Layton, he has been for most of his life.
He endures tragedy after tragedy, not even remembering the first, but he doesn’t let that change him. He loses his best friend (loses the rest of the Stansbury gang), his partner (then a month in a coma) and even when he remembers his lost family, he stays a good man, a true gentleman.
I don’t know how to end this, just wish I could add a section on Rachel but we know so little about her ugh
22 notes
·
View notes
Do you agree w/ the fandom interpretation that john was so homophobic he’d have beaten up and abandoned his sons for being gay? Cause sure, he grew up in the 60s as a mechanic and then later became a marine during the vietnam war, but i also don’t think homophobia would’ve necessarily been a priority for him? Like obviously he’s not gonna be the full on supportive and politically correct loving dad, but i think that the fandom’s general opinion on that is pretty warped by people’s relationships w/ their own fathers
I do think this is one place where people tend to project. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that; working out our issues through fiction is healthy and good! I don’t think there’s any canon proof of it beyond, as you said, him being a marine from the sixties who would probably not be super knowledgeable about being queer, maybe a little apprehensive about it from what he’s absorbed through the culture he grew up in. I think we’d be correct to point out that if Sam or Dean were queer, he might be uncomfortable about it, he might try to avoid the topic, which is in of itself hurtful.
The thing about me is: I fully disagree that John was ever physically abusive towards his kids. At most, I will bend this interpretation to say he was probably too harsh on them while teaching them to fight and that maybe he and Sam have traded blows before when arguments got too loud (by blows, I mean, probably shoving with the yelling, you know, assertion of physical space. It seems realistic to me that two people who have been using violence for a long time to protect themselves, and for John, his family, down to the hierarchal power he’s put in place of him -> Dean -> Sam, would resort to it when things got too heated.)
(I also think that sometimes fandom’s insistence that John had to be physically abusive can sometimes get a little insulting because it perpetuates the idea that emotional abuse does less harm and can be overlooked and for flattening out John’s character in a way the show very literally pointed to and said He Did Not Do That. This is the entire point of Max’s episode in s1, for the show to point out that their experiences of abuse were different. How well it was handled is arguable, but I take it as clear evidence that when we talk about John’s relationship with his sons, the focus should be on the emotional abuse, the codependency he developed with Dean from a very young age, his neglect of them both, his attempts to suppress Sam, etc. And I appreciate this about the show, because you can’t talk about any of those things without also talking about why they’re happening, why John thinks this is necessary, how he loves his sons and isolates them to protect them and ends up doing more and more damage that will never leave them through their entire lives.
I’m sure there’s depictions of John being physically abusive that handle it with the same amount of nuance that the show handles him being emotionally abusive in canon. I have not seen them, unfortunately. I’ve seen John being physically abusive 90% of the time just being used as shorthand for him being Bad and Evil and A Terrible Father. Which does not interest me. So I will remain here as a staunch defender of He Would Not Fucking Hit His Kids.)
Sorry, okay, we got off topic there this is about gay shit.
The point of All Of That was for me to be able to say, John’s not going to react to his sons being queer by beating them. He’s definitely not going to abandon them. Hello? John Winchester? Abandon his kids? John Winchester, the guy who has been keeping them in warded up motel rooms their whole lives and moving them across the country out of paranoia the demon who killed his wife could find them if they say anywhere too long? John Winchester who only trusted one or two people to ever look after his sons when he went on a hunting trip too long? We think that John would ditch his kid because they’re queer???
Like I said, I think the most realistic reaction for John, (if not just flat out him going ‘that’s fine, now load this gun while I time you because that’s more important for me to know that you can do’, because. He kind of has bigger priorities to worry about here. Like werewolves.) would be discomfort and pushing it out of his view, ignoring it. Which would still fucking hurt! And would have horrible effects on Sam and Dean both, would encourage Dean to repress it if he thinks his dad is ashamed of him, would push Sam away if he trusts John with this fact about himself and can’t be accepted easily.
I just think this is truer to John’s character.
Anyway. If nothing else here persuades anyone reading that John Would Not Fucking Do That, well. He thought his kid was demonspawn, remember? He thought Sam was corrupted and might not be able to be saved. I don’t think you can get more clear queercoding than that, and you know what John’s very telling response was to that information, to finding out something a thousand times more terrifying than Sam being gay ever could be? To refuse to look at it. To insist to himself that whatever Hell wanted with Sam, he wouldn’t let it happen. To tell Dean to take care of it, because even when John is certain that his son might literally become a demon, he could never bring himself to pull the trigger on him. Because he loves Sam.
So like. He literally would not do anything for the much smaller realization that Sam is gay. His son has demon blood that might turn him super evil, and John still wouldn’t hurt him.
I guess what I’m trying to say here is, I try to keep the fact that John loved his sons at the forefront of my mind when I’m writing stuff about him, because I think if you let that slide out of your head, you can very easily make him much worse, much more flat than he was in canon. The real picture of him is just an extremely flawed man in a terrible situation who fucks up his kids as much as he protects them.
And also he wouldn’t care about them being gay because JohnAzazel real and true and they fucked sloppy in that hospital basement-
41 notes
·
View notes
"Had the gods taken me in that moment, there would have been no heaven that could have equalled my joy. Then, as always happens, the tab came due."
x. "NPCs", Drew Hayes
"All plans eventually fell apart, it was in their nature. Reality never complied with expectations, and one who expected plans to be pulled off perfectly was often overtook when chaos exceeded order."
x. "Split The Party", Drew Hayes
"You can teach technique. You can build muscle. You can train reflexes. But that kind of stubbornness comes from the soul."
x. "Going Rogue", Drew Hayes
"Try not to dwell on it... not because it doesn't matter, but because you'll never find the answers you need inside your own head. Our minds memories cannot be trusted; spend too long in there trying to find a memory that doesn't exist and you'll end up creating it. Imagination is a powerful thing-- especially when combined with uncertainty and selfdoubt. I've seen others build their own hells around them, with the fears of what they might have done."
x. "Siege Tactics", Drew Hayes
"Luck wasn't necessarily against them; they'd come out of far too many dire scrapes to believe such a thing. But theirs was not a luck that often put their feet on an easy path. Theirs was more a fortune of narrow misses and critical strikes."
x. "Nobel Roots", Drew Hayes
17 notes
·
View notes