#psych analysis

[rainbowmewz]

edward nygma (gotham) and OSDD-1a

hi! welcome to my hellhole!! i’ve been thinking about the topic of this post for a while and i just needed to yell about it here bc yelling about it on twitter under a meme post wasn’t enough for me xD

SO! let’s talk about this. i was highly generalizing in the tweet above because i personally don’t think edward nygma suffers from dissociative identity disorder. instead, i believe he suffers from other specified dissociative disorder, specifically subtype 1a.

below the “keep reading”, i will discuss a general overview of DID and OSDD, why i think this is the case for edward nygma, and a review of the representation of it in gotham. be warned that this post has a general trigger warning for discussions of abuse, self-harm, suicide, and drug abuse. this discussion is not in depth at all, but just as a warning if you wanna avoid this post! this post also has a trigger warning for discussions of negative portrayals of DID/OSDD (such as in films like m. night shyamalan’s split and discussions of tropes such as “evil alters”).

OSDD-1 is a subtype of OSDD that is very similar to DID. to get a general gist of what OSDD is, we first have to define DID. DID (dissociative identity disorder), which used to be referred to as MPD (multiple personality disorder), is a dissociative disorder that forms in early childhood as a reaction to prolonged and/or severe trauma (abuse, for example). this causes a child’s brain to split into multiple parts, called alters, and experience amnesia/dissociation between these parts. in OSDD-1 (other specified dissociative disorder), there’s two subtypes, 1a and 1b. in 1a, there’s dissociation between parts, but their parts aren’t as distinct as someone who has DID. on the other end of the spectrum, in 1b, alters are highly distinct but experience little to no amnesia between them. as stated previously, i believe gotham’s portrayal of edward nygma/the riddler has OSDD-1a.

to avoid confusion, in this post, i’ll be referring to the two as a whole as “edward nygma”, “edward”, or “nygma”; i’ll refer to the alter we’re first introduced to as “ed”; and the alter we’re introduced to next as “the riddler” or “riddler”.

while we don’t know anything about edward’s childhood in gotham, many other portrayals of the character (arkhamverse, general comic lore, etc.) mention an abusive past, specifically at the hands of his father. in general comic lore, this abuse explains where his compulsions for showing his intelligence comes from. if this backstory is true for gotham’s portrayal of nygma, which we will assume for this analysis, this is the trauma element of OSDD.

our first introduction to the idea of edward having a dissociative disorder is in season 2 episode 1. while this is our first introduction to the difference between ed and the riddler, the two seem to have a history of co-existing before this scene (ed tells riddler stuff such as: “i get nervous when you talk to me with other people around like that” and “i know where this is going. i told you, leave ms. kringle alone”).

now that we have those basics down (trauma and evidence of a long-standing dissociative disorder), i’ll be referring to an article written by DID-Research.org titled “DID Versus OSDD-1″. this will hopefully help my thoughts be more concise, since i tend to.. go all over the place with this stuff. i tried to write my thoughts on this topic in a discord server before and it went in 50 different directions x3

DID-Research’s article discusses how the parts in OSDD-1a are different from disorders such as borderline personality disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and complex posttraumatic stress disorder. while OSDD-1a’s parts are way less differentiated as ones in DID or OSDD-1b, since individuals “are more likely to present as the same individual”, these parts can have “different skills, emotional reactivity, or ways of interacting with the world”. to me, this sounds exactly like what riddler and ed go through throughout gotham. as early as season 2, riddler is shown as more confident, brash, and witty than his counterpart. ed is more focused on living a normal life, he wants to live out this fantasy with kristen, then isabella, then lee. this is all he craves, to be seen as normal and not a freak. riddler on the other hand, isn’t as concerned. sure, he originally wants to pursue kristen, but in a way to introduce a sense of excitement and power in him and ed’s life.

this mention of ed’s craving for a normal life is something.. very interesting as well. according to the theory of structural dissociation, there’s two types of parts a person with OSDD/DID could have. these are referred to as Apparently Normal Parts (ANPs, these alters take care of daily life, often are avoidant (or unaware) of trauma, and have a need to appear high-functioning (sound like anyone we know?)) and Emotional Parts (EPs, these alters represent dissociation and trauma through memories, internalized beliefs, and learned responses). ed seems much like an ANP, while riddler seems more like an EP. an article discussing the differences of ANPs and EPs states that an ANP “might engage in self harm or use psychogenic substances in attempts to forcefully tether themselves to the present and prevent EP from intruding”. this sounds very familiar, does it not? his abuse of hallucinogens in season 3 to see oswald again, using pills again in season 4 to try and get rid of the riddler, and if i remember correctly, plotting to kill himself in season 4 as well.

as i stated, the article talks about how OSDD-1a is different from an identity disturbance in disorders such as BPD, PTSD, and C-PTSD. the article specifically says that people with these disorders might feel a loss of control, but never “feel that different parts of them are capable of acting independently or that different parts of them have and express their own views or goals”. this exact quote proves that what nygma might be experiencing is OSDD-1a. our introduction to the two psyches of edward nygma show their differing goals and views. as another example, in season 5, riddler is completely unaware of ed’s plan to destroy haven and is shown as extremely distraught when he appears in different places without knowledge of what happened beforehand.

so.. it seems obvious that edward nygma has OSDD-1a, right? so... how would i, as a psychology major, someone who possibly has DID/OSDD, and someone who’s known multiple people with DID/OSDD, review this representation?

i’d say... it’s pretty good for what it’s worth!! gotham as a tv show has always dealt with terrible writing and a lot of things could have been written better, but this topic is surprisingly one they handled pretty okay. there was... a lot of room for more and it’s quite strange to see the dissociative disorder representation go to edward nygma instead of a character such as harvey dent (who’s a whole other can of worms and has been stated to have “MPD” in the past).

it’s really refreshing to see representation of DID/OSDD that doesn’t rely on played out and disgusting tropes such as “evil alters”. while it seems like riddler might play out as an evil alter, both ed and riddler are both messed up in their own ways. there’s no evil alter to stop, they’re both.. villains in their own ways (blowing up a place w/ the most vulnerable members of the city vs hiding your dead gf’s body parts over a police precinct, pick your poison). i also enjoy how cory michael smith portrays the two psyches of edward nygma and portrays the way the two switch in and out!

you’re free to disagree with my opinion as well. i’d love to have a discussion in the comments or reblogs :DD!! i just... really enjoyed writing this up. if i missed anything, just tell me :33

[headspace-hotel]

"New (old) perspectives on self-injurious and aggressive biting" published in Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis / Nine Inch Nails- The Hand that Feeds

I was troubled to see a trend of claiming that Autistic people who do not support Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) are a group of "low-support-needs" autistics who are monopolizing the conversation and taking resources away from autistics with higher support needs—I think it is misunderstanding.

Individual positive or negative experiences with ABA are irrelevant here—the fundamental core of the therapy is behaviorism, the idea that an autistic person can be "treated" by rewarding "desirable" behaviors and punishing "undesirable" behaviors, and that an increase in desirable behaviors and decrease in undesirable behaviors constitutes successful treatment

In researching I found that ABA practitioners have published statements condemning conversion therapy. They refer to an unfortunate historical association between ABA and conversion therapy, but it is not association—ABA literally is conversion therapy; the creator of it used it to try to "cure" little boys that were too feminine.

ABA is considered "medically necessary" treatment for autism and the only "proven" treatment, in that it is proven to create decrease in "undesirable" behaviors and increase in "desirable" behaviors.

Undesirable behaviors for an autistic person might include things like stimming and talking about their interests, desirable behaviors might include eye contact, using verbal speech, playing with toys in the "right" way.

The BCBA behavior analyst code of ethics does not prohibit "aversive" methods (e.g. electric shock) to punish undesirable behaviors

The code of ethics only discusses the consent of the "client," not the person receiving the treatment

Many people will say "my child's ABA therapist would never make them repress harmless stims, give up their interests, use electric shocks...They understand the value of neurodiversity and emphasize the consent of the child..."

But consider...if nothing binds or requires an ABA therapist to treat stimming as important, nor restrains them from using abusive techniques, nor requires them to consider the consent of a person being treated, what protects vulnerable people other than luck? The ABA therapist still has an innately unethical level of power over a child being "treated."

Furthermore, consider: can a therapy built on the goal of controlling the behavior of a person who cannot meaningfully consent to it, especially without hard limits or protections on the kinds of behavior that can be coerced or controlled, ever be ethical?

I found many articles that discuss teaching "compliance" in autistic children, treating "compliance" as a reasonable goal to strive for without qualification...

The abstract of the above article struck me with a spark of inspiration. Biting is an undesirable behavior to be controlled, understandably so, since most would feel that violence should not be allowed. But I was suddenly reminded of the song "The Hand that Feeds" by Nine Inch Nails, which is a play on the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you," meaning don't lash out against someone that is kind to you.

But doesn't "the hand that feeds you" implicitly have power over you through being able to give or withhold food? In this case, kindness can be a form of coercion. Thus "biting the hand that feeds" is used in the song as a metaphor for autonomy and resisting coercive power. The speaker asks the audience if they have the courage to test the benevolence of their oppressors, or if they will remain compliant and unquestioning even though they know deep down that it isn't right.

Likewise the article blunders into something unintentionally poetic when it recognizes that biting is an innately possible behavior in response to "aversive" stimuli or the "removal of reinforcers." Reinforcers and aversives in ABA are discussed as tools used by the therapist—the presentation of a preferred food would be a reinforcer, for instance (and is often used as such in ABA).

The journal article considers biting as a behavioral problem, even though the possibility that someone may bite can never be eliminated. Contrastingly, "The Hand that Feeds" highlights the coercive power behind the ability to control your behavior, even when that control appears benevolent and positive, and argues that "biting the hand that feeds you" is not only a possibility but a moral imperative.

Consider: In what circumstances would you bite someone? To defend your own body? To defend your life? Are there circumstances in which biting would be the reasonable and the right action to take?

What authority decides which behaviors are desirable or undesirable, and rewards or punishes compliance or resistance? Who is an authority—your therapist? Your teacher? Your caregiver? Any adult? Any person with the power to reward or punish?

In what circumstances might compliance be demanded of you? In what circumstances would it be justifiable not to comply? What authority decides which circumstances are justifiable?

Can you imagine a circumstance where it might be important for a child to not comply with the demands of an adult? For a citizen to not comply with the demands of a government? Which authorities demand compliance in a right and just manner, and which demand compliance to things that are evil and wrong? Which authority has the power to differentiate the two? Should you trust them? Will you bite the hand that feeds you?/Will you stay down on your knees?

[pinazee]

So, to be honest, spelling bee is an ep that had to grow on me. It just always seemed too outlandish of a crime i think, idk. But the ep does show us more about shawns dysfunctional relationship with his father and Gus’s motivation to participate in Psych. Not to mention Juliet.

Gus is highly intelligent but in a way that feels he never utilized it properly. He has the mental fortitude to become a doctor if he wanted, he has the drive and the willpower it takes to become invested (as shown with how deep his knowledge of the bee and other subjects goes), yet he never did. We see in the pilot how little he actually cares for his “real” job. It pays the bills, thats it. At the end of the day, Gus plays it safe, and you get the feeling in the pilot that he’s not happy with where he’s at. He’s stagnant. Unfulfilled. Just as lost as Shawn.

In a lot of ways, they’re similar with that aspect. Both him and shawn have a variety of interests and skills, yet neither seemed to pursue a career in those fields. In shawns case, in his own words “he mastered it and moved on.” He got bored (ahem, ADHD). But i think in Gus’s case, he was too afraid to try. Or maybe nothing quite gave him enough of a spark to want to. As everyone later points out, Gus has a shit ton of potential that never seemed properly used.

Until Shawn comes around. And he needs him. He needs all of Gus’s knowledge and skills. He even finds the clues that the doctor was fake and Jari was sitting next to the kid with the inhaler. And its fun. He’s excited. Psych brings him joy.

As for our intro to Juliet- fantastic. We learn so much from so little screen time. She can banter with Shawn easily, and isn’t afraid to give pushback or to give Lassiter pointers (which considering she’s like brand new and he’s a bit of a prick is saying something), and she trusts her instincts to follow through with Shawns advice. Shes a good cop. Almost the antithesis to Lassiter. Shes warm, friendly, and trusting to his cold, distant, and weary.

Side note:

James motorcycle face makes me lol every goddamn time

[downbadbytheriver]

OK so I had a thought today while playing BG3 re: Astarion. Out of all the companions/party members, Astarion is the one who looks towards "you", aka the PC, more than any other during dialogues. And no matter if you are romancing him or have high approval. I've noticed this fact is often used in screenshots where people are like, "aw look how he looks at my Tav/Durge 🥹".

BUT, here's a different take on that ^.

TW: discussing abuse, trauma

Astarion's particular trauma is in the form of long-term abuse and manipulation where he had to obey and perform 'correctly' for Cazador, or face serious consequences and punishments. People with this specific flavor of trauma are often very, *very* in tune with others' behavior and emotions, due to the fact that their survival depended on this skill and their ability to read their abuser(s) and their mood, perception of them, etc. *Even if* what the abuser(s) are upset about is not their fault or even may have anything to do with them - almost *especially* then, actually.

I think Astarion watches the PC intently out of survival habits and a need to read them constantly for any sign of behavior change.

It's not a signal that the PC is abusive; it's just a survival skill Astarion will probably never stop using, like any of us who have ever *had* to use it constantly. It doesn't stop once you're out of the abusive situation or relationship, safe, or even in a healthy relationship. Once your mind learns to do it, you never stop. (It can also have positives, like being very empathetic towards others and picking up on moods/behavior changes in a way that makes you very good at supporting and helping others.)

Watching Astarion do it makes my heart hurt, but also love his writing even more.

[meanbossart]

I have possibly a stupid question, and maybe you've already answered this and I missed it (so sorry if I did I swear I scrolled for it) but, does DU Drow like anyone the way anyone in the real world could like someone? Like friends/family/romantic interests, ect, like does he consider whether he enjoys people's company or does he just like whether people are inferior or somehow amusing to him?

If i'm understanding your question correctly, you're asking if he strictly categorizes people as either "threatening and must be antagonized" or "amusing and hence Can Hang, but I wouldn't cry over their corpse" or if he actually interacts with anyone with the intention of making meaningful connections - sorry if I'm misinterpreting you.

If that's the case though, that's a very good observation about his behavior! But not something that can be answered with a simple yes or no. People apply filters to the world and stick others into boxes for the sake of keeping their own internal narratives consistent - his is one of deep distrust, distance, and self importance. His world is very black and white and hence, people are too.

There was a window of time between the nautiloid and the later game where he had no choice but extend some trust onto other people, which is how Shadowheart came to be such a good friend to him and Astarion became his romantic interest, and later partner. He let his guard down for a little bit, some people got to come in - then he put a slightly more forgiving version of it up again. Pre-tadpole Drow didn't give anyone the time of day, but the DU drow as we know him at least thinks that the world is a little more amusing and colorful than before; people make him laugh and have interesting stories to tell, and being weaker in body does not necessarily make them completely worthless to him anymore. Not to mention his newfound capacity for recognizing when someone has him beat in the intellectual department or willingness to show vulnerability to the two aforementioned characters.

He still needs those qualifications to feel secure in himself and in control of the world around him, but it's an improvement. I didn't want to write him as having fixed all of his hangups by the end of the game, but he's not static as a character either and has the capacity for change, as his interactions with Astarion, Shadowheart, and other characters in ANE hopefully imply.

So, in summary, the dude does enjoy people's company, he just came up with a funny cope for it.

[jasonswh0rre]

The Psychological Analysis of Jason Todd

I am a psych major, and my professor is allowing us to make an analysis of any character of our choice, so I figured who better to write then Jason Todd. This was very fun to write and I very much enjoyed rewatching Batman: Arkham Knight. Please enjoy. ☁️ Warning(s): Trigger Warning for Trauma, Mental Health Content, Violence, Graphic Imagery, Spoiler(s)☁️ Word Count: 2.6k ☁️: Authors Note: I am working on fanfics, more headcanons for Arkham Jason, unfortunately I am busy with classes, assignments and deadlines. I will try to be punctual but it may take time. Thank you for your understanding.

Introduction 

Jason Todd is the secondary villain in Batman: Arkham Knight, which has the same moniker. He is the second Robin and Bruce Wayne's adoptive son.

Jason Peter Todd was born in the slums of Gotham City to two drug-addicted parents, who would eventually try to settle a debt they had by giving Jason away when he was a baby. Jason received no parental figure to help guide him, leading him to petty crimes such as theft to nourish his survival. Jason is a character who takes what he needs if it means prolonging his survival; his lack of a parental figure leads him to an identity crisis between longing for a parental figure and convincing himself he is better off without one. When the simple truth is that every human needs a mother and a father, we respond positively to a nurturing environment, and through early adolescence, our brains crave the structure needed to build us into well-rounded adults. 

At fifteen, Jason inadvertently met Batman while committing robbery when Batman was fighting Gotham's notorious supervillain, The Joker. Believing Batman is in trouble, Jason jumps between pushing the hero from harm's way. Despite life's misfortunes, Jason possesses a remarkable code of morality enough to want to save someone. Jason, attempting to rid Joker of his breath, aims a pistol at the clown and, before firing, is knocked out of his hands by Batman's batarang. Unfortunately for him, Joker would leave Jason with a cryptic message, one for the young man to head.

Jason would later be apprehended and taken into custody in the back of a police car by Batman after Batman retrieved his gun and stolen money. However, rather than being charged, Jason receives a blessing through a Wayne Industries project that helped troubled teens; through the program, Jason was able to turn his life around. All attract the man who helped Jason find a new purpose: Bruce Wayne. Months after being released, Batman appeared in Jason's dorm, again offering Jason another opportunity. 

2nd Robin and Kidnapping

Taking Jason in as his ward as well as dubbing him Robin after Dick Grayson, Jason sought justice and enjoyed being a hero. Like the previous Robin, he showed a keen aptitude for it; unlike his predecessor, he possessed a fiery temper and willingness for more lethal force. While Jason's temper is directed towards the criminals that harm the innocents, Batman views this as inexcusable, fearing the day that Jason will kill instead of reprimanding. 

In the most twisted sense of irony, Jason's morality inevitably becomes his downfall. The Joker has blown up a school with kindergarteners; this leads to Jason's resolve that Joker needs to die. Knowing that Bruce would try to stop him, Jason abandons his comms and tracker so he can kill Joker. However, it is a trap, and Joker ambushes Jason. Jason was kept in a wheelchair, bonded by barbed wire that kept Jason leaning hunched over in excruciating pain. Throughout his pain, Jason's mind remained still; he was confident that Batman would find him; his sheer will at the beginning of his torture is, with all honesty, remarkable as Joker has been known for his mental abuse and mind games he plays with his victims including his sidekick, Harley Quinn. 

In the six months of his torture, Jason's unwavering mental resolve was slowly crippling as Joker had wanted; throughout the game, Jason's voice mixed with crippling fear and small doubts about Batman coming. The Joker feeds into his doubts by showing him a photo of Batman with his replacement, Tim Drake. This leaves Jason troubled as he slowly loses hope for Batman. 

The last act of Jason's torture involved a video sent to Batman via The Joker of Jason, who has undergone all his brainwashing; in the video, Jason is sitting down in a chair; he is not chained, barbed, handcuffed, or kept sitting still in any way by all means Jason could easily walk away. This is a significant and crucial part of Jason's torture as it symbolizes just how much mental anguish and emotional exhaustion Jason went through to the point that he no longer had a yearning for freedom—making him downright timid and submissive towards Joker enough to out Batman's identity when asked by the latter. This results in Joker shooting Jason point-blank in the chest, as Joker "never could stand a tattletale." However, this was only a ploy to make Batman believe Jason is genuinely dead.

On the contrary, Jason was kept alive for another year, endeavoring more torture, mistreatment, and malnourishment. Harley Quinn did the final touches of Jason's emotional and mental brainwashing; a former psychiatrist who manipulated Jason into believing that Batman was the cause of his anguish and his pain was his doing; she did this long enough, even punishing Jason by waterboarding him and electrocuting him when he refused to say Batman, indicating he still had some level of awareness of who was torturing him. 

However, once Harley could get Jason to say Batman's name, Jason was drugged and beaten by two prisoners dressed like Batman; he was given a gun by The Joker and was ordered to kill them. Jason's resolve and humanity were a cord, still entrenched in him before Harley convinced him further, snapping his humanity and getting him to shoot the two dressed-up prisoners dead.

During the riots of Arkham Asylum, The Joker paid mercenary Deathstroke to keep Jason there and shoot him if he escaped. However, Jason convinces Deathstroke that Joker will not keep his promise and that if he helps, Jason will triple whatever Joker plans to pay. Accepting the offer, Deathstroke assists Jason in escaping, stealing a helicopter, and flying to Wayne Industries. Jason steals millions of dollars from his former guardian. Ironically, crossing paths with Tim Drake, who assumes Todd to be Deathstroke's sidekick, when Jason's ankle is caught between Tim's grappling hook, Jason cuts the cord, allowing Tim to fall when suggested by Deathstroke that killing Robin would bode well for them with the Dark Knight. Jason Coldy says that if he dies in a fall like that, Batman needs to pick his sidekicks better. 

Jason's psyche has been torn and scattered, leaving him a hollowed carving with a mocking J branding etched onto his face, from birth his eyes were already met with darkness, born to parents who never showed him recognition, let alone love, and through the Wayne Industries Project and his adoption by Bruce his eyes were wide, and remarkably hopeful, to be free of the weight of Gotham's misfortunes finally; those eyes that looked with gleam forced shut until he saw nothing but blackness.

Arkham Knight's Birth

Jason adopts a new persona built on the pain and suffering in the wake of his escape from Joker. He feels betrayed by the one person he only had in the world and wants vengeance. Jason works alongside Scarecrow, one of Batman's enemies. The two begin a plan on Halloween to take Gotham and Batman's legacy along with it. Jason gathers all Batman's enemies to join, assembling a militia with Deathstroke. While working with each other, Scarecrow "tests" his fear toxin on the young man, sending him on a psychological spiral. One of his more apparent fears is the Joker, who can be found near, in the background, or standing right in front of him laughing and mocking him, but beyond the clown prince of crime's appearance, Jason also sees his replacement, Tim Drake, and "fights" him.

The fight has Jason severely outnumbered in the beginning, with Tim succeeding, even using his staff to choke Jason, forcing him to the ground as the Jokers around him laugh. Further into the fear toxin, Jason appears in front of Wayne Manor, where he throws down his helmet and says the following: "Someplace warm, someplace safe, someplace where I'm needed, someplace where I'm loved," Joker once again appears in front of him laughing and mocking him on whether he even deserves it, this is Jason's internal struggle in a manifested form of the person who caused him harm, of the person who convinced him from the start that he was alone and would not be saved. Jason is mischaracterized as always being angry or standoffish, but anger has more truth than any lie detector can scoop. Jason feels this anger is not just because of some personality trait; anger is his cry out, and he's shouting to be seen and loved. This is most likely due to being tortured at 15 or so, which, despite the fact that at the time of Arkham Knight, he was in his early 20s, his mental age was regressed to the age when he was captured. This makes Jason appear at first glance as someone emotional, cocky, and arrogant. He values safety and love; he doesn't want to be on his guard 24/7, but he's grown up in an environment where letting your guard down gets you killed. He follows Joker into Wayne Manor, where he sees Bruce; suddenly, several versions of Batman appear in the room. They beat him and told him they never wanted a partner or even a son. This is a conflict that has always waged war in Jason's mind. Jason's biological father attempted to give him up and then belittled him when he explained that Jason's worth was so low that he couldn't even leave him; he has low self-esteem that he internalizes into rage in the way that he fights to prove his strength. 

This is why Jason has a strong attachment to Bruce/Batman it maybe due to an underlying desire to seek his approval especially by the time when he adopts him. Bruce gives him everything he could ask for and anything he could think of, and Batman gives him a purpose. Ironically, this is still the case despite Bruce himself having an avoidant attachment style. 

Conclusion and Diagnosis

Jason Todd's character in "Batman: Arkham Knight" exhibits a complex interplay of psychological factors that align with the diagnostic criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). One prominent feature of BPD is emotional dysregulation, characterized by intense and rapidly shifting emotions. Jason displays various emotions throughout the game, from anger and hostility to vulnerability and despair. His reactions often appear exaggerated or disproportionate to the situation, indicating difficulty regulating his emotional responses.

Furthermore, Jason's sense of identity is notably unstable, which is another hallmark feature of BPD. Having grown up in a dysfunctional environment with absent parents, Jason lacks a stable sense of self and struggles to define his identity. This is evident in his adoption of various personas, including Robin, the Arkham Knight, and, later, the Red Hood. His shifting identities reflect a profound inner conflict and a desperate search for validation and purpose. Jason's interpersonal relationships also reflect the interpersonal instability characteristic of BPD. He forms intense and unstable attachments to figures such as Batman, vacillating between admiration and resentment. His interactions with other characters are marked by rapid shifts in perception, alternating between idealization and devaluation. For example, while Jason initially idolizes Batman as a mentor and father figure, his feelings of betrayal and abandonment lead to resentment and hostility towards him.

Moreover, Jason exhibits self-destructive behaviors as a coping mechanism for his emotional pain, another hallmark of BPD. He engages in reckless actions, disregarding his safety to seek vengeance against those he perceives as enemies. His confrontations with adversaries are often fueled by a desire for self-assertion and control, masking more profound feelings of emptiness and despair.

Underlying Jason's behaviors is a pervasive fear of abandonment, stemming from his traumatic upbringing and experiences of betrayal. This fear drives his desperate attempts to maintain connections with others, even as he pushes them away with his volatile and unpredictable behavior. Jason's fear of abandonment manifests in his interactions with Batman and the Bat family, where he oscillates between seeking their approval and rejecting their authority.

Jason Todd's character in "Batman: Arkham Knight" embodies many of the core features of Borderline Personality Disorder, including emotional dysregulation, identity disturbance, interpersonal instability, self-destructive behaviors, and a fear of abandonment. By analyzing his actions, relationships, and psychological struggles within the context of the game's narrative, it becomes apparent that Jason's character aligns closely with the diagnostic criteria for BPD, providing a compelling framework for understanding his complex and multifaceted personality.

Besides indicating various symptoms of BPD, I would also consider diagnosing Jason with Complex Post post-traumatic stress Disorder (C-PTSD). Given Jason's background of severe trauma, including childhood abuse, neglect, and prolonged torture at the hands of the Joker, it's worth considering Complex PTSD. C-PTSD typically develops in response to chronic trauma and is characterized by symptoms such as emotional dysregulation, disturbed self-concept, difficulties in relationships, and a persistent sense of threat. I would include diagnosing Jason with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD): Jason's experiences of profound loss, trauma, and betrayal may contribute to symptoms of depression, such as feelings of hopelessness, worthlessness, and a loss of interest in activities. His struggles with emotional regulation and chronic feelings of emptiness could also align with depressive symptoms. Following my diagnosis, I am also inclined to believe he suffers from attachment disorders; given Jason's tumultuous upbringing and experiences and a multitude of parental figures involving neglect and abandonment, it's possible that he may have developed attachment-related difficulties. This could manifest in insecure attachment styles, fear of abandonment, and challenges in forming and maintaining healthy relationships. 

Furthermore, I would consider Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD): While Jason displays empathy and compassion at times, his willingness to engage in morally questionable or violent behavior, as well as his disregard for societal norms and rules, may align with some features of ASPD. However, his capacity for genuine care and loyalty makes this disorder out of sorts with his character.

Lastly, Post-Traumatic Embitterment Disorder (PTED): PTED is a proposed diagnostic category characterized by intense feelings of injustice, betrayal, and embitterment following a traumatic event or series of events. Jason's experiences of betrayal and abandonment, particularly by Batman and the Joker, may resonate with the symptoms of PTED. 

In conclusion, the character of Jason Todd in "Batman: Arkham Knight" presents a compelling portrayal of psychological complexity shaped by a tumultuous history of trauma, betrayal, and profound loss. Through a comprehensive analysis of his experiences and behaviors throughout the game, it becomes evident that Jason embodies many psychological struggles, warranting consideration for various diagnostic possibilities. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) emerges as a primary candidate, given Jason's emotional volatility, identity disturbances, and interpersonal difficulties. His tumultuous relationships, intense fear of abandonment, and self-destructive tendencies align closely with the diagnostic criteria for BPD. Furthermore, Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (C-PTSD) offers another lens through which to understand Jason's psychological profile, considering his history of chronic trauma and its pervasive impact on his functioning.

Additionally, Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) may contribute to Jason's experiences of profound despair, hopelessness, and emotional emptiness. His struggles with attachment-related difficulties suggest the possibility of underlying attachment disorders stemming from his early experiences of neglect and abandonment.

While Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) and Post-Traumatic Embitterment Disorder (PTED) offer alternative perspectives, they may not fully capture the complexity of Jason's character, given his capacity for empathy and genuine care, despite his propensity for morally questionable behavior.

In essence, Jason Todd's character in "Batman: Arkham Knight" is a poignant exploration of the human psyche's intricacies, illustrating the profound impact of trauma on identity, relationships, and emotional well-being. By delving into his psychological struggles within the context of the game's narrative, we gain valuable insights into the complexities of mental health and the enduring resilience of the human spirit.

[rabbits-of-negative-euphoria]

you can tell Shawn is faking his general cluelessness by how badly he freaked out when he couldn't remember the events of the retirement party in Last Night Gus

[stainedglassthreads]

One thing I think I just realized is, in addition to being dissatisfied with how stories deal with Toriel’s grief compared to Asgore’s and Asriel’s, and how I don’t see many instances of Toriel and Asgore’s quarrel being addressed in a way that satisfied me... I don’t think I see that many AUs that quite get the responsibility Asgore feels... right.

Yes, I’ve seen several that portray his grief, depression, and how badly he doesn’t want to be in this position well, even if it’s disappointing how not everyone seems to be aware of what you learn about him in a Neutral run where you’ve previously killed Flowey. A lot of people can get aspects of his characterization very well, the broken man, the goofy dad, the intimidating monarch. But I think the reason I don’t see people capture the weight of his responsibility quite as well in fanfics and comics is... well. Oddly enough it’s in the way the monsters treat him.

It’s not just the fandom that has issues with idolizing or demonizing characters. It’s also the Kingdom of Monsters themselves--and they all idolize Asgore. Yes, he’s a very grounded and compassionate individual who invites his subjects to share all their problems with him, and who Papyrus insists will just let you pass through the Barrier. But he’s also a bit of the subject of a cult of personality for his subjects. When they say he’ll absorb seven souls and become a GOD, it’s not an expression of his arrogance, but rather their own adoration. While out-of-universe the Angel is generally agreed to be either Asriel or Chara(or us), in-universe I wouldn’t be surprised if Asgore was considered the Angel.

It’s not long now. King Asgore will let us go. King Asgore will give us hope. King Asgore will save us all.

Yes, individual monsters may want to collect a human soul for their own individual wants and desires. But it’s only the capture of a human soul, or using a single soul for their own benefit, that they really aspire to. (With the exception of Toriel, who wants no souls, and Flowey, who is Flowey.) Of those area bosses who earnestly try to take just one soul, Papyrus and Undyne both want to hand you over to Asgore, and Mettaton wants to protect humanity FROM Asgore. Literally everyone in the Underground seems to fully believe that Asgore will be the one taking all the Souls and fulfilling his promises, and all are content. (Again, barring Toriel, MTT, Flowey.) No one seems to ever doubt he’ll do as he says, even his ex-wife, and no one’s greedy to take the power for themselves or take the burden of being a savior for themself, except his kid who has both a God Complex and a Savior Complex.

With Chara, and with Asgore. They take a person and turn them into a representation of something More than any singular person could ever be. And then in the worst route Chara does it again, to themself. Asgore is freedom and salvation and retribution itself, and everyone including the woman who was once married to him agrees and reinforces the role. Chara is the feeling of a number going up, and the fandom agrees and reinforces the role.

And I dunno. There are fics and AUs where Asgore never lost his kids and always remained an affable, friendly guy. There are AUs where Asgore is the main antagonist and an awful villain with few redeeming qualities. There are fics and AUs where Asgore gets to recover in a post-pacifist setting. But I’m not sure any fics or AUs have ever quite captured how everyone else just talks about the guy, for me. Toriel is simply ‘intimidating’. But Asgore is a GOD.

[aba-daba-dooo]

I started rewatching Brooklyn 99 with my family because they wanted another cop comedy after finishing Psych. But I’m reminded that the thing I really like about Psych is that it doesn’t fall into the “clean up the streets” trope. So many cop shows have a main character who thinks of criminals as human garbage or think that sending people to jail ultimately betters the world. And they make that stance very clear. But Shawn is really just invested in doing the right thing by someone else. He doesn’t just immediately go for the obvious suspect. He openly believes and makes friends with convicts. He finds redeeming qualities in criminals who people would otherwise despise, like Yang and Despereaux. He works hard to right his wrongs when it comes to cases. (Maybe this is because he breaks the law at least once per episode and really can’t judge anyone? Like he sees other humans as his equals and it’s kinda refreshing.) It’s just very cool how subtly different the take on good vs evil is in the show. Morality is fluid and I like it.

[artful-peculiarities]

I’ve just had this really specific vision of post canon Doug Eiffel being a mechanic. Maybe even though his memories were drained from him, the movements of repair are still familiar, and I think it would also add something to his characterization once he’s back in earth with the others. I’m gonna think about this some more and come back to this post in a bit

[themyscirah]

Complaining abt Suicide Squad yet again but the fact that they have Waller exposing the alien community to space racist attacks and talking abt how she got to her position through deceit and being a terrible person and stuff is just. Ahsfiwueh JUST SAY YOU DONT KNOW WALLER.

Anyways literally the 3rd mission of the Squad ever (and the first framed as smth Waller picked and not orders from above) was the Squad discrediting and stopping a rogue vigilante who was only arresting POC and funneling white people into white supremacy groups (of which he was the most prominent member) in SUICIDE SQUAD #4. and it's explicitly framed as this mission being personal for Waller that she's hiding from the government bc its illegal like. Guys. Please why are we having her incite (space bc comics) racist attacks now

Also the whole "Amanda got her position through deceit and being a terrible person" NO. she KEPT her position through being shitty and playing complicated political games!!! She wasn't always that way like there is a difference and it is IMPORTANT ppl PLEASEEEE. In Secret Origins #14 we learn Amanda's backstory and she used to be a normal, caring person! Like even after she entered into working in government and politics she wasn't automatically morally bankrupt like please people. She was originally given control of the Squad by Reagan (*sigh* 80s comics...) to distract and get rid of her because she was so successful at pushing progressive social policy in Congress. Acting like she's this static pillar of evil is such a waste of her character and so fucking uninteresting and disrespectful to her arc it drives me MAD.

Like I am NOT saying Waller is all sunshine and rainbows, she fucking SUCKS (said w love <3) but like there's a human being there. It's a progression, she has a character arc like please, DC, please!!! They've fucked up Waller so bad and made her so opaque and uninteresting she can't even be the protagonist of her own story for fucks sake!

Like I don't know how many times I have to scream it until DC hears me or remembers but WALLER IS THE MAIN CHARACTER OF SUICIDE SQUAD. ITS HER BOOK. yet right now she's a cutout to be used as the villain wherever the writers please. Even in her book we get none of her perspective really displayed, no exploration of her thoughts with any kind of understanding of the role she traditionally has played and was made to play in the story.

[ashkgray]

Hey, hey, writers of Psych. ☺️ J'ai une question 😄☝🏼Isn't it 😚 a little ✨counterproductive ✨ to bring back Shawn's obvious and actually cannonical mancrush 😊 in the same episode where he wishes he could tell Juliette he loves her?🙃 (S05E10) What is this, closure??? ( the man shows up again so I DOUBT THAT )

Why the fuck would you have Gus saying "which one are you freaking out about, Juliette or Despereaux?" ????

Why would you have Shawn absolutely bedazzled by this "art thief" and WHAT DO YOU MEAN HE BOUGHT HIM A BIRTHDAY PRESENT AND WHY DID DESPERAUX ACTUALLY TAKE IT??

No and the blatant "I don't love you anymore" to him!? SO HE DID LOVE HIM BEFORE. CANNONICALLY. OKAY. COOL. YEAH.

And what's that scene with Juliet!? She walks into the room and it plays like an "I'm hiding a hottie that would make you jealous so I'm super awkward" scenario and IT'S NOT EVEN SUBTLE CUZ JULES STRAIGHT UP ASKS IF THERE'S A WOMAN IN THERE BRO HELP ME.

And lest we forget the face Shawn makes when Despereaux's absolutely going at it with this lady ( WHO SPOILERS I GUESS: later betrays him by the by ):

AND THEY MAKE DINNER PLANS AT THE END!?!? huh HUH!?

What are you guys doing to me 🥰

Writers of Psych ☺️

Let's talk 😘

[navarice]

horror and psychological thriller in tgcf was done so incredibly well that if the beautiful and touching love story wasn’t incorporated into the book, I would be fully convinced mxtx decided to switch to another genre.

no one really talks about her fascination with the descent to madness and the morals surrounding humanity. at least one main character of each book goes through it. for lbh, it stemmed from the fear of abandonment and the emptiness that follows when the people you care most about decide you aren’t worth being chosen. for wwx, it was the outside in. society deemed him a monster so he had no other option available to him. no way to prove them wrong, and no way to convince himself he’s not either. anything he would do, despite his most well meaning, sincere, and self sacrificing motives, will always be twisted by the world who likes to paint others the devil. for xl…it was such a defeating combination of the two that it was near impossible for him find a way out. no family nor friend to turn to, no place to hide or run away, continuously forced to confront dilemmas beyond anyone’s capacity that sawed away at his already frayed sanity. worse was him having to confront godhood doesn’t mean omnipotent, nor does ascension mean free of suffering.

the way i choose to see it as this is her commentary on human nature, in both freedom and fallibility. ascend to heaven as a human, yet those in heaven are still human. wants, desires, fears, traumas, love, hate, selfishness, self-lessness, kindness, compassion, sacrifice, loss, hubris, duty, family, friends, hierarchy, power, and, above all, free will are all things that make humans what they are. are we wwx and xl? sacrificing ourselves time and time again only to have it all thrown back at our face? never once chosen or understood unless when it’s something short of a miracle? or are we the masses? afraid of the sinister, the disease, the wars? afraid for our young and old, for the talented and lame? for our lives and legacy? what are we, if not forever doomed to be helplessly flawed and hopelessly human?

the way she sees it, we have always been, and always be, both sides. because to her, they aren’t mutually exclusive, but rather each reflections of the other. both never wrong, but never quite right either. convoluted and confusing, mundane yet a tale as old as time.

mxtx writes her beautiful loves stories seamlessly. but she displays her talent best of all by weaving tales of hope and humanity into the threads.

[devastatinglygreen]

hey, uhm, so...anyone else familiar with eros and psyche wonder just how far they're taking this metaphor for them now that cressida named them as such herself?

like, you know. that whole pesky moral of the story being that there is no love without trust and how psyche had to endure a whole lot before eros forgave her and begged for her to be saved by divine intervention?

gonna go fling myself off a cliff now that i remember psyche was usually depicted with butterfly wings as well. bye.

[short-wooloo]

One of the most often misunderstood parts of Star Wars is the concept of giving in to the dark side

Too often there's the idea that when you give in, the dark side takes control of you

But it doesn't, it can't, the dark side is not some external force that you allow in

It's just you

The dark side is in you, it's in all of us, it's a terrible part of ourselves, it's the terrible impulses and emotions we feel and must consciously choose to resist

Giving in to the dark side is not someone else controlling you

Giving in to the dark side is when you stop controlling yourself

[faramirsonofgondor]

Insane how many TV show characters have incredibly traumatic backstories or go through a shit load of trauma only for the writers to be like “yea and then they became an asshole and ruined all their relationship for no reason whatsoever.” and then they’ll be like “what do you mean that’s so out of character? no it’s not i literally wrote the character.” LIKE YES BITCH and they used to be a GOOD person and friend??? they would do anything for their friends and family??? ANYTHING. they spent eons trying to fit in and they dedicated so much time making sure their family was safe. and now you’re saying that they’re just selfish out of nowhere???

OR EVEN WORSE. when they fucking forgive their abuser for no reason or because their abuser was on drugs or addicted to alcohol. and then they get sober and magically become a better person??? what??? you mean the person who neglected their child??? the person who abused their child??? AND THE SAME CHILD GETS HATED ON FOR BEING RUDE OR EMOTIONALLY UNAVAILABLE AND PEOPLE STILL DON’T TRUST THEM OR LIKE THEM EVEN AFTER THEY MADE CONSIDERABLE EFFORTS TO UNLEARN THE HABITS THEY DEVELOPED TO SURVIVE THE ABUSE THEY WENT THROUGH??? IM SO TIRED OF SEEING THIS HAPPEN IN SO MANY TV SHOWS. LIKE IF IT WAS ONCE OR TWICE I WOULD BE ANNOYED BUT ITS FUCKING EVERYWHERE.

Just to be clear I’m not talking about shows that have established characters perpetuating the cycle of abuse from the beginning, or progressively getting worse over time, because while I don’t necessarily like those plot lines, they can make sense when they’re done right. But I fucking hate it when it comes out of nowhere and ruins all the backstory the character had and goes against all their earlier motivations.

And while I don’t particularly like it in TV shows when a character forgives their abuser, I can understand it when the abuser actually realizes the weight of their actions, doesn’t try to excuse them, and makes efforts to do better. But almost all TV shows where the character forgives their abusers ends up with the one who was abused being labeled as a problem child or too much to handle/too difficult and the abuser gets to be forgiven without any real development or apology or effort.

Like there’s so many different examples of this happening - Jamie & James Sr. from Ted Lasso, Jess & Liz from Gilmore Girls, Buck & his parents from 9-1-1, Shawn & Henry from Psych (I said what I said), like half of the entire MCU, and multitude of other characters. Like all of the kids were emotionally neglected and abused (and sometimes physically as well) and then they “acted out” (they insulted people, were maybe a little bitchy, and acted immaturely) and then somehow them acting out and being immature or eccentric becomes a central point of their character, and other characters are often annoyed or upset with this part of the character. But then the adult who yk, abused their fucking child, is viewed sympathetically by the other characters because they “were having such a hard time” and “were really struggling” while they were abusing their child. And now that their kid is all grown up they “don’t want to have a bad relationship” and “only ever wanted what was best for them, they just didn’t know to how give it to them”. LIKE GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK MAN.

How is it the kids fault they were a bit immature or a bit of an asshole after being abused for their whole life but it’s not their abusers fault for abusing them???? like what the fuck??? Like it makes me sick to my stomach when other characters are like “wow it must have been so hard to raise them” when they literally DIDN’T raise them, they fucking abused them. Don’t even get me started on when they give the abused kid an actual parental figure and the abused kid opens up to them about how hard their life was and the parental figure does their best to support the kid only to turn around and encourage the kid to forgive their fucking abuser. Like what are these writers even on????

Anyways fuck forgiveness for the sake of forgiveness. You don’t need to forgive shit just because your abuser had a sad backstory. Womp Womp for them. Addiction doesn’t excuse abuse. Grief doesn’t excuse abuse. Divorce doesn’t excuse abuse. “Wanting what’s best for you” “being raised in a different time” or being “misguided”isn’t an excuse for abuse. Them having abusive parents isn’t an excuse for abuse. There isn’t an excuse for abuse. You don’t need to (and IMO shouldn’t) forgive an abuser just because they’re at a better or more stable point in their life than they were when they abused you or because they suddenly got FOMO and realized they’re gonna die soon and they don’t want a shitty relationship with you. And if they and other people are pressuring you to forgive them, then they clearly don’t realize the weight of their actions or how serious they were.