#that there is no excuse to demonize NPD just because he has it.

[forcedjuggalofication]

narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real narcissistic abuse isn’t real n

[yummygender]

Narcissistic Loki HC

(Got this idea off of a Cinema Therapy video on Loki, will talk about NPD and mental health as a whole as well as self harm, abuse, and murder. Just straight up murder. This man killed people.)

NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder): A disorder in which a person has an inflated sense of self-importance. The cause is unknown but likely involves a combination of genetic and environmental factors.

Ok, obviously he got it from being taken away from Jotenhiem at such a young age only to learn about it like a millennial or so later.

This poor boy genuinely craves to have emotions like Thor.

He’s so scared of asking questions because of the fear of being told something he doesn’t want to hear and then have to hold back any reactions that could be seen as negative.

Is know for getting into extremely toxic relationships with people and ends up being with them for too long or ending the relationship by ruining everything they had, which constantly angers him.

His mental health? Yeah, this ain’t it chief…and sadly Asgard has no therapists or anything similar to that.

Has actually burnt himself on purpose with candles while reading just to feel something.

Once he did learn about it while strolling through Midgard while trying to get away from Odin, he went into a depression episode which lead to a panic attack in his bed at 3 in the morning.

Is too scared to tell anyone because mental health and mental illnesses aren’t a thing in Asgard and by learning about it in Midgard, he also learned that it was constantly demonized like him by mortals so he just said ‘fuck it’ and never told anyone about it except for a few therapists he talked to while on Midgard that were found dead in their offices due to ‘heart attacks’. (Yeah, he killed them.)

When he falls in love, he doesn’t recognize it at all and will deny it before the person he’s in love with points it out.

In fact, he doesn’t recognize any emotions at all because Odin never taught him.

Frigga had a feeling he had some sort of personality disorder since he was a kid, but never really had any proof.

Due to the amount of abuse he suffered from Odin, whenever someone yells at him or says something he doesn’t like, he will frantically build up walls of excuses and deflects anything.

Sensitive to any feedback but genuinely wants to be told if he’s doing something wrong. (Yeah…Mobius has a lot on his hands rn)

If you raise your hand while talking to him, he will either block or attack first and act like it never happened only to later fully realize what happened and run back to apologize in tears.

He’s so scared of getting hit or hurting people that he will oftentimes purposefully withdraw himself from the world as a whole and lock himself up in his room.

Yeah…

…

[jewishvitya]

Personally, seeing people with NPD talk about the problems with the term "narcissistic abuse" was enough for me to have an issue with it. NPD is a trauma-induced disorder and I can't bring myself to treat it differently from other disorders that get stigmatized and demonized.

But seeing the origins of the term and the person who coined it, I honestly feel both horrified and validated.

The shortest summary I can give: this term was coined by a bigoted abuser named Sam Vaknin. He has no background in psychology, and he coined this term to excuse his own abusive behavior by saying he had no choice. He wanted to claim the abuse is in his nature. No accountability, no need to change. The whole concept started out to justify staying a harmful person.

This post has more information on him, listing transphobia, homophobia, rape apologia, and more from the creator of the concept.

Now this idea fills every social space a person with NPD could occupy. If someone with NPD seeks out community and resources to manage the issues caused by their disorder, instead of help all they will find is conversations about how they're inherently harmful. They'll find abusers that were never diagnosed being named narcissists, because it's now just "bad person disorder." And with how common it is to armchair diagnose hurtful people, they won't even need to look for it.

And there's this attitude, this assumption that a person with NPD can't be hurt, or if they do get hurt they inherently deserve it. I've seen their concerns dismissed with jokes, like "lol why won't anyone think of the narcissists" - because how dare they ask for consideration when their disorder is discussed. From my perspective, it's seems dehumanizing.

I've been thinking about this for a very long time because I know more than one survivor who uses this term. I see it everywhere online now, either explicitly or by implication through calling abusers narcissists. Survivors of abuse deserve to speak about their experiences and their trauma. There should be a way to name this kind of emotional and psychological abuse, without adding to the stigma of an already-stigmatized disorder, and without armchair-diagnosing abusers with disorders we don't know they actually have.

I have a problem with the urge to group every dangerous person into the same category. It's the same issue I have with the idea that people who don't experience empathy are inherently bad, like the lack of mirrored emotions means they can't be compassionate and kind. Brains are too complicated for there to be one trait, or one kind of wound, that makes someone a bad person. It's human nature to seek out something to blame, to try to make sense of these things, but I think it's good to interrogate the thought patterns that come naturally.

I'm not saying that there's no person with NPD who's an unrepentant abuser. But people are people, and in every group there will be those that don't care about the harm they cause, and those that want to be good people. Abusers fall into patterns because those are the patterns that keep their victims under their control and get them what they want. There is no "bad person disorder."

Always suspect rhetoric that encourages you to dehumanize someone. Always. If a line of thinking leads you to seeing a person or a group as monsters - it's dangerous.

[none-gender-left-man]

"this person has character flaws that deserve to be accounted for and corrected and they need to acknowledge this and grow as a human being to become healthier for themselves and others in their sphere"

And

"this person has serious mental health issues and are still human even if they have platform, and they deserve room to improve themselves without being attacked for every other mistake or misspoken thing so long as they genuinely are trying to be better and they don't deserve to have their conditions Targetted and be told derogatory and ableist shit like they're "cringe and annoying" bc that's not valid criticism that's just being a bully."

Are statements that need to co-exist.

It's not "social crit" if all you're doing is Ad Hominem. That's literally a logical fallacy to attack something that isn't objectively bad about a person or relevant to the argument. Much like, y'know, people attacking someone *cough* Travis McElroy *cough* for being enthusiastic, hypersensitive, and easily made uncomfortable because of neurodivergence.

He's not Unproblematic, but nobody fucking is. If you claim to be you're full of shit. Correct when he messes up and move on, because he has shown time and time again that he WANTS to do better ffs. He's not some shitlord bigot with his heels dug into the ground, he's a decent man with low empathy and mental struggles that is trying so fucking hard to be a good man. Existing as a neurodivergent or disabled person in the public eye shouldn't be a fucking immediate sentence to cancellation when they have relapses or slips in their judgement. Lack of self awareness and having to learn to manage it is caused by BOTH ADHD and NPD, which Travis has.

It wouldn't be an excuse for unapologetically shitty or harmful behavior, but when he does something bad he fucking listens and reflects and takes responsibility.

Just say you think everyone with cluster B disorders are demons and that people with ADHD are obnoxious and go. This includes the disabled and neurodivergent ppl I see attacking him this way and then claiming it's fine bc they're ND or disabled. That's not how this works and you are not immune to internalized ableism.

[niniane17]

So, I've watched Lindsay Ellis' latest video, titled "Why do we love Narcissists". The thumbnail is a bit misleading, since it makes it look like it's just an analysis of Loki's character, while it's actually an exploration on how people with NPD are portrayed in the media, with a strong focus on the MCU. Overall it's good and I liked it, especially her commentary on who she considers to be the quintessential narcissist of the MCU: Ego, Peter Quill's father. Her take on NPD in general is also very interesting, and I agree with her that demonizing NPD (which doesn't mean excusing horrible behavior or having unrealistic expectations of a sudden change) doesn't help anyone.

As an analysis of Loki's character, however, it's lacking and I don't find it as well-researched as it could have been. I suspect a lot of this has to do with the fact she is a huge Ragnarok fan.

For one thing, she only analyzes the differences between Ragnarok!Loki and TV Show!Loki, and while indeed there are many, I don't think it's fair to talk about Loki without taking into account the other three movies he appeared in. The Loki in the first Thor (who is largerly responsible for starting the Loki Fandom in the first place) is absolutely not a narcissist: if anything, his brother was. The Avengers and Thor The Dark World gave him more narcissistic tendencies, but even there it was clear that it was more due to circumstances (his resentment towards Thor, his meeting with Thanos, Odin's parenting and so on) than any inborn characteristic people -or at least Thor- were always aware of. It's only in Ragnarok that Loki acts as if he's always betrayed and backstabbed people, and suddenly his conflict was about something else entirely. We should also remember that a huge part of Loki's downfall into evil was due to the untimely discovery of his heritage and internalized categorism, something that both the TV show and Ragnarok gloss over almost completely.

I have mixed feelings about the show, but I have to recognize that it had the thankless job of not only reconciling so many different Lokis (one of the reasons why they went meta about it) but doing so in a way that wouldn't tarnish the Asgardians and the heroes, so they settled for justifying their hostility towards him (as we can see from Sif's scene), while simultaneously allowing Loki to change and become a hero.

I think Ellis is right when she says the show's climax lacks tension because its Loki is "too nice", but that's because she is using Ragnarok's Loki as a reference. Other Lokis are absolutely capable of being more selfless.

In conclusion, the video is a nice and compassionate analysis of NPD in popular media, but unfortunately Ellis is not a Loki fan outside of Ragnarok and it shows. Her Phantom reviews are much better in this regard.

[checkfortraps]

I think a lot of people are overreacting about Travis, but it also seems like there are a lot of fans (myself included) who are disappointed in his behavior, not just this stream. He makes a lot of weird no homo tweets and has talked about parasocial relationships being bad while still forming them actively it feels like, and idk he’s been a fixture of internet culture for near a decade now, he should know that his actions have impacts far beyond himself. I dont think mental health is ever an excuse, and it’s weird to see how quickly people will be like “oh but he has NPD” when other people don’t get that same grace. this isnt the first time he’s said something uncomfortable then lashed out at fans for it, and it’s great he apologized this time, but idk maybe we put too much investment into random men online. like all legit criticism of him gets reduced to ppl claiming cyberbullying, and obvi i dont support the people who are doing that, but there are legitimate criticisms of the way he acts online and treats his fanbase, and maybe he does have NPD but anyone who’s been treated for a personality disorder can attest that our symptoms can directly harm people if we aren’t cognizant of that, it isnt ableist to say that

Oh yeah, trust me, I’m fully aware and agree that personality disorders, or any sort of mental illness, aren’t an excuse to act like an asshole. What I’m saying is that even if you go to therapy and work your ass off to not display symptoms, it might still happen occasionally, and being a Popular Internet Man doesn’t protect you from that. So yeah maybe it happened before, but honestly, that’s just how mental illness is - it pops up from time to time no matter how hard you try, and all you can really do is apologize and move on. I’m saying that as someone who has BPD - another very demonized personality disorder. And having ADHD on top of that, well, that can really mess you up re: impulsivity even if you try very hard not to let it. Also, for the record, I’m not even that into the McElroys - I only ever listened to TAZ Balance and nothing else - and certainly not ‘putting too much investment into random internet men’ or forming parasocial relationships with them. I’m just voicing my thoughts as someone who’s also dealing with a difficult personality disorder that impacts my filters and tends to make me act impulsively if I don’t keep a very tight leash on it. (And certain things can make you lose your grip on that leash, like family drama, pressure in your work life, or, like right now, a global pandemic; it’s not a personal failure or ‘not trying hard enough’ when it happens while you have severe outside stressors, or maybe trauma is resurfacing. You never know what other people privately deal with, after all.)

Just saying, someone being famous doesn’t mean they suddenly have a better grip on their mental illness. They’re only human too, after all, and to be human means to sometimes fuck up and yes, even hurt people on accident. The important thing is to own up to that and apologize, and Travis did that, so I don’t see what continuing to call him out is gonna do here. And saying ‘oh but this person did this in the past without apologizing, that means they’re inherently bad!’ is ... not great because people can change and learn and grow, and we shouldn’t decide if someone’s a Bad Person based on some stuff they did in the past. (Unless it’s like, pedophilia or being a nazi or something like that obviously.)

But yeah TL;DR: of course having a mental illness isn’t an excuse for problematic behaviour or absolves you from having to take responsibility for it, but I think we should practise some compassion when people slip up - even if it’s someone famous - as long as they apologize and try to do better. And yes, you can start trying to do better at any given time - it’s rarely too late for that. (And I do think Travis is aware of how questionable his behavior was, because he apologized. If you don’t think you did anything wrong, you’re usually not inclined to make amends for it.)

But that’s just my two cents. I really don’t interact with McElroy content or Travis specificially enough to have a comprehensive opinion of him. I’m just an advocate for being forgiving of people with difficult to handle mental illnesses like NPD, BPD, schizophrenia, etc. as long as they own up to it and try to do better. I’ve been on the receiving end of being demonized for my personality disorder before, and trust me, it sucks. (Though it of course is always valid to be disappointed when someone loses control and lashes out at you. This isn’t a black-and-white issue where only one half of the conflict can be right.)

[jcmorgenstern]

please rant about the second half of COLS and COHF

this ask opened pandora’s box, consume at your own peril

Basically…my biggest problems with the second half of COLS and COHF as a whole is really just…Jonathan as a character really, truly, utterly, and absolutely makes no sense on a very fundamental level. Like I really don’t say this lightly, I spent almost all of last summer trying to piece together a coherent characterization and eventually came to the conclusion that…there wasn’t one, at least that I could see.

(Readmore for length, heavy criticism of the work (obviously), and mention of canonical attempted rape).

So before I jump right in to providing evidence for that uhh slightly bold claim, I do want to acknowledge that Jonathan in COG totally makes sense, even if certain uhh incestuous aspects of his character do make my eyes roll back into my skull. To me, it always seemed a bit evident that the series was meant to end at COG, and the second half of the trilogy was sort of an ad hoc thing that happened after the series kept building popularity and there was demand from the fandom (and the publisher) for content. If taken alone, Jonathan’s character in COG is relatively self-consistent, and I’ve posted before (also at length….lol) about how Jonathan’s character in COG alone is actually a bit tragic, and it’s not until COLS that he truly makes a villainous turn off a cliff. Though the incest is, from the start, #a bit much, we all know that that’s just how CC novels go and, to some extent, ya just gotta roll with it.

The first half of COLS continues to be pretty exciting from a Sebastian Enthusiast perspective–in fact, for me, it’s really what made me fall in love/hate with the character and his portrayal to begin with. And some of the character work in the first half of COLS is actually pretty good!! We have the moral ambiguity of the Jace/Seb bond, Clary being unable to tell to what degree Sebastian in lying, the slightly random, wild, and jumbled snips of his character coming through (vampire threesome, vampire fetish, wearing Jace’s cologne??, fashion whore, messy bitch, shitty poetry writer?? it’s all free real estate) and then he lays out what could have been such an interesting plot!!

All the mentions of the increasing number of demons coming through to Earth is finally being used after being mentioned ad nausea for three whole books!! We’re set up for an interesting, shades of grey antagonist who thinks the ends justify the means and that sometimes a Wee Murder is needed to end an unjust regime (the Clave) without realizing that removing the Clave violently without any real and just alternative will create a power vacuum that invites even worse outcomes!! And the protagonists have to navigate slightly more complex moral issues than “genocide is bad, really!!”

And then…er, no. Like, really no. The entire book does a complete 180 and says no, all that (questionable) character development was a complete lie, all the human motivations you could possibly ascribe to the villain are bunk, he just wants to destroy the world. And not only that, he tries to rape Clary and….yeah no. (I’ll talk more about that later…I have a lot to say).

And for me that was really a massive disappointment. Like, to be clear: it wasn’t that I wanted Jonathan to be a pure uwu soft boi who did nothing wrong ™, or that he would be anything other than an antagonist. But like….a) rape. no. and b) I did sort of want his motivations OR his goal to sort of make sense and follow any sort of reason but honestly…they don’t.

The rationale CC tries to offer is that Jonathan doesn’t understand the meaning of love and wants to bend the world to his will so that it will love him instead. And like….that works to an extent, but then she also very clumsily attempts to make him a psychopath and…

Look.

If you’ve followed my blog for a while you know my feelings on poorly-written psychopath characters but…I’m gonna be real honest with ya here….a true psychopath is, with a very few fine exceptions like the entire population of high-security prisons, super fucking boring. They’re emotionally shallow, both internally and externally, and are usually driven by very grounded and unemotional goals. Winning a promotion. Attaining a position of power. Becoming a neurosurgeon. Having the best lawn in the zip code. “The psychopath next door” isn’t Hannibal Lecter, it’s your shitty boss or that one prick who calls the HOA on you for having your lawn one (1) millimeter over regulation.

And you know what? I’d take a story about Hannibal Lecter, lawn fascist. I’d maybe even take a story about Jonathan Morgenstern, shitty CEO, though honestly that sounds dangerously close to 50SOG so maybe not. Because if written well, the sensational serial-killer psychopath can be genuinely thrilling in fiction.

But honestly in this case?? It doesn’t work. Not even getting into the issue of “are signs and symptoms of psychopathy diagnostic in a child soldier” issue (pro tip: almost definitely not), why does he want to burn down the world? Why does he want to kill downworlders if he is basically one? How does he react to his father’s ideology? Does he even have a consistent ideology? Why doesn’t he stay at home playing Mario Kart?? If you can’t answer any of these questions, psychopath or no, anything he does is literally just not convincing and falls flat.

And now I’m going to segue into my “demon blood as a metaphor for child abuse” rant, which will hopefully segue into my “the demon army and ending of COHF is bullshit” rant, and maybe round it all up with my “you don’t have to have your villain graphically try to rape his sister to convince your audience of teenagers he’s a Bad Dude” rant.

So! Demon blood. So full disclosure, the scene in question is probably my actual favorite scene in COLS and the series at large, god knows why really, but it was actually pretty well-written as a hook for a thread that was totally dropped and never ever ever mentioned again. I’m talking about the scene where Jonathan asks Clary for a strength rune, and he tells her Valentine whipped him as a child with demon metal. His wounds will never heal, and serve as a reminder of the “perils of obedience” which is, quite possibly, the most chilling and interesting turn of phrase in the entire series.

And if you think about it, “wounds that will never heal but hurt constantly” are a pretty canny metaphor for the emotional abuse that shapes Jonathan and his ability (or lack thereof) to relate to others. Valentine never particularly loved or even cared for Jonathan, and used him as a child solider (drop me another ask if you want to know the rationale behind that one, kind of not a lot of space for that here) in his genocidal crusade, complete with brainwashing and pretty obvious physical and emotional abuse. That stays with him, twists the way he views love and truth, and leaves him with a permanently negative view of self and worldview that he doesn’t seem to put much effort into overcoming. To be clear: being abused doesn’t make you evil. But in the absence of love and support and positive role models to help you unlearn things, anger and pain can twist even good motives into bad actions, and lbr, Jonathan doesn’t have an over-abundance of good motives. The real peril of obedience is never questioning what you’re told.

But of course it’s never mentioned again, so like, fuck me or whatever.

The show does a better job of it, and almost directly links Jonathan being Like That to what Valentine, Jocelyn, and Lilith did to him and…does a pretty good job of not woobifying him or dismissing his pain. Him having demon blood is almost completely uncoupled from him being “evil” (or, more accurately, doing evil or cruel things) and is instead his responsibility. What makes him “incapable of love” is that he was never shown love, and what makes him violent and cruel is that he was only ever taught violence and cruelty.

But in the books demon blood is definitely intended a metaphor for psychopathy. “He had the humanity burned out of him because of his demon blood” “he’s incapable of love because of his demon blood”…you get the picture. But considering she honestly doesn’t really hit psychopathy and (to me) pings in more at ASPD (antisocial personality disorder, the DSM-V approved version of psychopathy, with some MAJOR and important differences in diagnostic criteria) or NPD (narcissistic personality disorder), I sort of…don’t like how demon blood is directly used as a metaphor for mental illness. And once the demon blood is gone…poof! so is his “evil” so uhh yall read between the lines with me on that one.

(If you want a rant on why I think book Jonathan fits better with ASPD or NPD than psychopathy, drop me an ask, but god please consider the consequences. Also, I generally don’t feel comfortable “”diagnosing”” villains for the hell of it, but in this case since the canon itself has already Gone There and I’d be operating mostly off the DSM, I’d feel slightly less shitty about it).

Anyway. So what I deeply, passionately, truly hate about COHF is the ending, when the demon blood is burned out of Poor Green-Eyed Jonathan and There Is Not Enough Good In Him So He McFucking Dies. What fucking enrages me about this is like…the ENTIRE series is about how “blood doesn’t equal morality” EXCEPT in the case of this one guy apparently because fuck him and fuck consistency!! Also on a slightly different tack it completely erases all culpability of him as a person and like….what, “the demon blood made me do it” is now a viable excuse?? what the fuck. no. what the fuck. also what does “not enough good in him” even MEAN in the context of someone who LITERALLY DESCENDED HIS MOTHER’S BIRTH CANAL THAT WAY oh my god its??? so fucking stupid and the philosophical implications ENRaGE me especially like.,,,as a geneticist….we kind of had a wee run-in with that kind of thinking….it was called “eugenics” you may have heard of it….G OD !!!

Also that doesn’t even get into the contradictory nature of Jonathan’s actual characterization (I use the term loosely) itself like…sometimes his dialogue reads almost like Jace’s, but by the end of COHF he literally quotes Jesus Christ (render unto Caesar’s what is Caesar’s), says “FOOLS!!11!!1!” like….literally once a page, I think at some point dips into vaguely Shakespearean English while violently whiplashing into whatever “ ‘You’re insane,’ said Simon. ‘You’re dead,’ said Sebastian” is?? and is overall an editor’s literal worst nightmare. There is NOTHING driving this character other than pure, unrestrained literary chaos, and absolutely nothing he does or says seems to make a hell of a lot of sense and is designed purely #4 the evulz. It’s just so painfully cartoonish that it physically pains me to read it and yet, here I am, holding the physical (hardback) copy that I own, reading it, and physically shuddering jesus CHRIST

(You did uh, definitely ask for a rant, right?)

OH yeah uhh and to round it all off…the “you don’t have to have your villain graphically try to rape his sister to convince your audience of teenagers he’s a Bad Dude” rant:

Look my friends there’s nothing wrong with Clebastian but there is definitely something wrong with rape and lbr: there’s a lot of it written into this character and his relationship with his SISTER and fuckign thanks!! I absolutely hate it. Apparently, when asked why she chose to include the graphic attempted rape scene in COLS, CC apparently said she “wanted to make sure the audience knew he was beyond saving.”

Look.

Look.

When a guy builds a demon army to obliterate the world and everyone in it, I generally get bad vibes. Worse vibes, in fact, than from a guy who tried to rape his sister, though that’s pretty fuCKING bad. The point is, there is absolutely no fucking reason to do that. Seriously, there’s not. And when your entire NYT bestselling fanfic series is based on the incest fetish HP fanfiction, it’s?? proBABly not the best idea to like…include an attempted rape scene between two siblings in a work that already has a lot of UST between presumed or actual siblings because people WILL talk and.,,,can u blame them lol

On a more serious note…female protagonists are so often forced to undergo rape or sexual humiliation as part of a narrative (or worse, for titillation of the viewers–looking at you, GOT and also yeah lbr COLS). Even in the show, which has definitely improved on some weaknesses in the original narrative, Clary is nearly raped by a demon in order to awaken her rune powers. That’s disgusting, honestly, and unnecessary, and you know what? Luke Skywalker didn’t have to face a rape threat to get his powers, and neither should a female counterpart. The show didn’t even ADDRESS this later, or even bring it up at all, and that’s even more upsetting, and part of why I don’t have faith in the WR to bring the concept of a Jonathan-Clary bond in 3b to life in a way that doesn’t make me want to curl up into my epidermis like a chrysalis and never emerge again. (See also: Lilith’s unaddressed sexual assault of Jace, and Camille’s equally unaddressed assault of Simon).

And what bothers me almost more than all this is…it’s not like Jonathan’s creepiness is subtle. He constantly invades Clary’s personal space, makes comments she’s uncomfortable with, puts her in situations she doesn’t like. You could leave it there and I guarantee most of your readership (especially your female/female-aligned readers) will INSTANTLY pick up on the fact that this guy is Bad News and you know what?? Clary isn’t subjected to that bs for….the heck of it?? Not that subtlety is ever the strong point of this series but like…that’s a huge glaring issue and one I can never overlook, and why I’ve honestly chosen to basically Ignore Canon And Do Whatever The Fuck I Want.

In summary: Jonathan was basically shoed in as a) a half-assed foil to Jace and b) a plot device/fix and c) fodder for more incest after Jace and Clary were no longer brother and sister and tbh?? Not entirely here for it.

tldr: jonathan morgenstern is a dumb bitch and no one is valid, more at 9.