#to the point of trying to make in universe justifications

[thydungeongal]

Anyway ultimately justifications based on "well that's how it is in the setting" about stuff in any media will ring hollow if the criticism is approaching it not from the point of view of interrogating it through in-setting logic but from the point of view of an actual human being making a conscious decision to make it like that.

Like yeah we can sit and jerk off all day about how killing cultists is justified through in-game logic because they're literally trying to make Hell real, but when viewed with even a modicum of media criticism you can maybe start to wonder why cultists are such a common villain in medieval fantasy gaming.

Similarly, yeah, sure, in-universe orcs may have been created by an evil god and that's why they're predisposed to evil, but given the already racialized portrayal of orcs in the source material they come from plus the game further adding the reading that they're actually tribal savages, it suddenly puts into context some of the Fucked Up stuff that the author of the game said later in his life.

Anyway, none of this is to say that if you're not constantly thinking about this or flagellating yourself while engaging with the game you're somehow a bad human being, but like the stuff in fiction didn't just emerge out of The Void but came to as a result of someone's decision to dedicate it into the writing. Some people just enjoy thinking about this stuff in our free time, like I certainly do, and speaking for myself interrogating media like this rarely affects my ability to enjoy or engage with said media.

[hiveswap]

Summary of The Cat of The Year poll atrocities of 2023/2024

I'm sure that most people on this side of tumblr have seen the Jellie vs. Nefarious Anglerfish poll going around with like 60k votes at this point, and I'd really like clear up some of what happened since I was around for the whole thing.

Url blocked out for op's privacy. They have already left but don't look for it if you haven't seen it/don't harrass them if you already have.

1. The previous round (preparation)

I discovered the poll in its previous round, needless to say she beat Jort's ass severely. This was around the 3rd of january, meaning that this round finished before jellie's passing with only about 7k votes. Op did add their own piece of propaganda from their main:

...which was FINE. (except for stuff we'll see later) Of course running a poll while biased isn't ideal but I for one didn't even know they were the op until much later. I also added my own piece in a separate thread, and they didn't interact with it at all. There was no drama.

2. The Finale

Jellie unfortunately passed away right before the starting of this poll, which was the catalyst for what happened next. Op did exactly as last time and added a slightly more mean spirited encouragement to vote for the other contestant. This is the point where I believe that i fucked up personally.

I added this thinkpiece accusing op of associating all mcyters with Dream (who we all hate for the record) despite them not alluding to him at all. This is because tumblr has a history of disimissing all mcyters as... everything that dream was been accused of. Op did allude to not caring for mcyt. but they didn't say what i accused them of. This is important to point out because this reblog of mine is still being spread. Jellie was in the lead at the time, but not by the time i woke up next morning.

I won't be including anyone else's additions because I don't want to put blame on any specific person. Just felt like clearing up mine.

3. The Fuckening

Some time later op made this post to their personal blog:

which is insanely shitty because, as other people have pointed out, the "lame ass youtube cat" didn't die to inconvinience op or ruin their fun, and people would have probably voted for her anyway because jelly is universally beloved in the mcyt community. This isn't anti democratic. This post was added to the poll with a caption saying op should not be running this poll, and it took off. Op later went on to say that this was a joke:

This apology was not taken well by people, (including me) because "you were not meant to see it" isn't an apology and they still very much made fun of someone's pet dying. Safe to say this did not make the drama stop and only added fuel to the flame. I believe this was the point where the conversation of mcyt fans being unjustly sent hate to was reignited.

We should discuss that! it's a real thing that happens often and is equal to childish bullying. However, in this case, OP was the only one getting sent hate to my knowledge. The notes were mostly saturated by mcyt fans, and even now i can only find one or two hateful stance towards us under the whole 20k notes post.

4. Conclusions

Op posted a second apology to the catoftheyear blog to try and calm people down (i believe this is comprehensive and a lot better than the previous one) The blog was deactivated shortly after, so i only have my phone screenshots of it that i also added to the poll itself at some point:

(Edit) Here's proof that op did not write the justification they got criticised for, from the notes of the original poll:

This apology didn't get seen, or get accepted by enough people, so op made this statement on their personal:

Needless to say I am deeply dissapointed (and guilty) that it's come to this. Yes, op said tasteless things that made us all angry, but telling a human being to commit suicide is worse than being insensitive about a stranger's pet dying. Even after I posted about the blog being decatived i had someone come into my notes to wish that "they never find happiness" i mean wtf. This isn't like shipping where we can do whatever without the content creator's input. this is fucking harrowing and i can't imagine how i'd feel if this was done in my/my pet's name especially after losing them as recently as a week ago.

I hope no one from hermitcraft who is on here (let alone scar holy shit) learns about this like they did with previous lighthearted tournaments. If you truly respect the creators you claim to be a fan of as people, you do not tell people to kill themselves over them. And finally, let Jellie fucking rest, guys. she had a long, good life. I hope op can come back and also avoids behaving like this if they ever wish to do so. I'm angrier at mcytblr, though.

[queenvhagar]

"Fire and Blood is biased propaganda by the maesters so nothing in the real Dance of the Dragons actually happened like in the books, you can't critique the show for showing things as they really were!"

I'm so tired of this take...

GRRM wrote the original ASOIAF series as an anti-monarchy and anti-war story. He's an author who makes a point to flesh out characters and motivations, he understands that there isn't truly a good vs bad narrative to any large-scale, real-world conflict like war, and he understands the sociopolitical factors involved. His series highlights that it's the most vulnerable people in society who suffer when those in power play their game of thrones and make consequential decisions based on their own personal motivations without thought to the consequences to those that will have to the pay the price for them. That's GRRM's entire point with the original series: war destroys everything, it is never really justified, and through war the powerful set in motion terrible events that the most vulnerable are most like to suffer.

So the idea that all of a sudden with the prequel book Fire and Blood GRRM pivoted to write a biased textbook that purposefully misconstrues a conflict where the real story behind the pages is that one side of a dynastic civil war was led by a faultless, pure woman whose divine right to rule was stolen from her, and she's justified in plunging the realm into war to reclaim her throne because the other side was uniquely misogynist against her and was made up of selfish flawed people who just wanted to steal her power from her because she was a woman...

Sure, Fire and Blood may be a history book with unreliable narrators and sources that are trying to recount long-lost histories of the realm and possibly failing to capture the totality of what actually occurred. But I can absolutely guarantee you that the intended real history of the Dance of the Dragons as it took place in the world of ASOIAF was not some black and white, good vs bad tale of morality where one side was right and the other side was wrong like the show and some fans are insisting.

The actual Dance of Dragons as it exists in the ASOIAF timeline and universe, keeping in line with GRRM's original intention and message of the ASOIAF books, is 100% a story of a flawed, ultra-powerful family that fractured into two ideologically different factions that led to a pointless civil war in which neither side was justified in their attempts to seize power from the other. The result was that the family killed themselves until the only survivors were the traumatized children left over from either faction. In this pursuit of absolute power within one family thousands were subjected to the abject horrors of war: pillaging, famine, torture, sexual violence, being burned alive, and so much more. Neither side was faultless. Neither side had "the right" or justification to enact this conflict. Neither side bore sole responsibility for the conflict. Neither side was good or bad while the other was the opposite.

It really just fits outside of the world of ASOIAF to think that Fire and Blood's account of the Dance of the Dragons was uniquely biased against a single woman and her side of the conflict wherein this woman and her supporters were actually good people that had bad things done to them and all accounts in the book relating to them are inaccurate, yet most accounts of everyone else in the story were more or less true and accurate to how events played out. Like are you actually serious that this is how you think this story and history played out in this world of ASOIAF? That ultimately the story of the Dance of the Dragons is not anti-monarchy and anti-war in line with the original ASOIAF series but actually it's the story of a uniquely good woman in this terrible world who had a rightful claim to the throne and whose power was taken from her solely because of misogyny so she was justified in going to war to take it back? Like that's your analysis and interpretation on this conflict?

The way that the show is presenting this story is so unbelievably and ridiculously reductionist and simplified to the point where you begin to question why someone wanted to try to adapt the material at all... but then of course you remember that 1) Game of Thrones made a lot of money for a lot of people 2) its later seasons of mediocre, oversimplified writing continued to be rewarded with huge budgets, profits, and awards nominations despite the obvious downgrade of quality 3) so many modern writers believe the general audience needs to be spoonfed ideas and that they can't handle complexity, so it's more important that they shape an existing story into something that is a palatable, profitable hero vs villain tale that everyone can casually enjoy (and ideally appeals to modern sensibilities) than they try to create a compelling, thought-provoking, interesting and faithful adaptation of the source material.

[wifegideonnav]

the importance of pov and kiriona gaia as gideon nav’s imperialist aspect

others have already made some really smart posts about how kiriona is gideon when she’s lost everything and everyone that made her who she was, and how even in the first two books, gideon was this terrifically sad creature who was disguised by the fact that she was her own narrator.

but I want to expand on that last bit, because yes. kiriona is a gideon who has lost everything, who has had to make tough decisions to survive, who has had to adapt to being primarily around her father (a manipulative asshole) and ianthe (ianthe). but this is also the first time we’re getting to see gideon from a perspective other than her own.

we’ve always known that gideon is a beautifully unreliable narrator - see her complete understatement of the fight before harrow opened the tomb, where she neglects to tell us that she almost killed harrow with her bare hands - but I think that for a lot of us, the introduction of kiriona was when we first felt that.

now, nona is not an objective narrator either (lmao). and she does actively dislike gideon (which is fascinating, and which I could go on about for several posts). but she does offer an outside perspective on gideon that we have, up to this point, been lacking.

because… yeah. sometimes, like anyone, gideon’s kind of mean. we know she’s a good person - her goodness is in many ways one of the central drivers of the plot - but that doesn’t mean she’s nice all of the time. it’s just that when she’s being mean to crux, or ianthe, or even harrow we can say, well that person deserved that. but the truth is, gideon has lived through the kind of hell that very few people could survive with any kind of goodness and softness left intact. she didn’t live through it, in fact. she’s just kind of… existed through it.

I saw another post point this out, and I want to reiterate: gideon’s goal, her whole life, has been to join the cohort. when we first meet her, we’re like, ok, makes sense, that’s the only ‘out’ available to her. and we kind of forget, even as we learn more about the empire, that what gideon wants to join is this actively and horrifically violent imperialist force. when we get to nona, and we meet hot sauce and her gang and joli and the angel and even the edenites, we expect gideon to have kept up with us somehow, to reject the empire. we want her to be one of the “good guys” (goodness in the tlt universe is another longass post I want to write…).

but gideon doesn’t reject the empire. because, crucially, she IS the empire - she is its heir, never mind the fact that that doesn’t really mean anything when the current emperor is immortal.

what I am trying to say is this: kiriona is gideon when you take everything from her, and then replace it with her father and everything he represents, and then take a step back.

that step back is crucial. it is what allows us to remember how imperialism - and by extension, or by metaphor, cruelty - works. gideon becomes cruel because she is in proximity to cruel people, AND because she is not in proximity to us.

THAT is what Muir is saying with kiriona. even the most kind, good, earnest protagonist can become a tool of evil in the right circumstances: and those circumstances include perspective. gideon, like it or not, is currently actively choosing to be a tool of empire. and if we were in her head, we might be able to - or we might be tricked into - accept her justifications for why she’s doing it.

the perspective shift is what allows us to see gideon as she - currently - truly is. it is no accident that this is when we get the outside pov. Muir allows us nowhere to hide; we have to confront what gideon has become and by extension what she always has been.

gideon nav is a good person, and I fully believe that in alecto we will watch her reject her father; I fully believe she will get to be a hero. but in order for that to happen, she - and we - must first undergo radical change and growth in terms of her worldview and attitudes. kiriona is not gideon’s final form. but in the same way that john is described by harrow as having aspects, kiriona is the aspect or facet of gideon that embraces cruelty, that perpetuates empire.

Muir tells us: even the most beautiful-hearted, trod-on girl in the world can become a tool of empire. but I have no doubt that in alecto she will tell us: this is how that girl can destroy it.

[saintvainglorious]

My First Fanbind! A Black Sails Fic Anthology Series

It took me a year (and a lot of anxious research) before I worked up the courage to bookbind fanfiction, and after months of on-again-off-again work, my first fanbind is finally done!

I knew that if I was going to bookbind fic, I had to bind something from the Black Sails fandom, aka the fandom and show that have had the biggest impact on my life. Y'all, I almost went into academia to study slavery in the 17th-18th century Caribbean because of this show - when folks say this show rewires your brain chemistry, they are NOT kidding. THEE show of all time. Happy 10th anniversary to Black Sails! This fandom is small but mighty. May we continue to get our hearts and souls blasted to smithereens by this show for many years to come.

Ao3 abounds with magnificent Black Sails oneshots, so I decided to put together an anthology of my favorite Silverflint fics under 20k, which I split into two volumes. Included are works by @justlikeeddie, @vowel-in-thug, @balloonstand, @annevbonny, @francisthegreat, @nysscientia, and more! Thank you, thank you all, you brilliant wonderful people, for gracing the Internet with such amazing writing. When I read the fics in these anthologies I want to fling myself into the sun.

More on the design and binding process below the cut!

Vol. 1 Page Count: 270 (12 fics) Vol. 2 Page Count: 248 (11 fics) Body Font: Sabon Next LT (10.5 pt) Title Font: Goudy Old Style Other Fonts: IM Fell English, pirates pw

The typeset (which I did in Word) took a while, mainly because I'd never done it before. Manually adjusting the hyphenation line-by-line was especially tedious. After making these books, I abandoned Word in favor of InDesign, in large part because InDesign gives you way finer control over your justification and hyphenation settings.

Regarding my actual design choices, I'm happy with how the ocean motif on the title page turned out (it's not the same pattern as my endpapers, but they're complimentary) and I'm very fond of my divider dingbats, which are little swords! Goudy Old Style was a fun title font to use, since it's the font that Black Sails uses as its logo. The stories in Vol. 1 are divided into parts based on what Silver WAS at that point in the show (cook, quartermaster, or king), and Vol. 2 is split up into comedies, histories (AUs set in the canon universe) and tragedies - befitting Black Sails' Shakespearean ~vibes~.

I stuck to a flatback binding, as I wasn't feeling quite ambitious enough to try rounding and/or backing. I've learned that I ~Anakin Skywalker voice~ hate sanding, enjoy folding/sewing, and don't LIKE edge trimming but enjoy the results enough to make it worth it.

The real adventure was decorating the cover, which remained bare for months. After agonizing over Illustrator and experimenting unsuccessfully with HTV and lokta paper embossing, I ultimately turned to using stencil vinyl to paint on the designs. There was a bit of seepage under some of the stencils, but I was able to scrape off the excess with my Cricut weeding tool without damaging the coated surface of the bookcloth (probably Arrestox Blue Ribbon from Hollander's). Even though it was very time-consuming, I'm so happy with the end result of the stenciled paint job and I intend to stick with stencils for my foreseeable future binds.

Are there things I would change? Sure. It was humid out when I printed, so the pages have got a wave. There’s an extra two pages in Vol 2. that I have no idea how I missed, and I got a line of glue in the middle of one of my Vol. 2 endpapers. I’m pretty sure I didn’t case in quite right, since my endpapers pull away from the case at the spine. I think the inner margins are a bit too big, and despite going line-by-line there’s still some wacky justification spacing in the typeset. But man, am I proud of these books! It is so satisfying to learn a new skill - MANY new skills, if we’re being honest - and to make something both beautiful and practical. If I’m still binding in two years or so, I can see myself redoing the typeset in InDesign, cutting out the existing text block, and reusing the cases. I’m also already planning for Vol. 3, which will be Silverflint Modern AUs.

Thanks for reading!

[ladytabletop]

Do you happen to have any resources regarding accessibility in ttrpg design? About design, colours, phrasing of text or anything else that could be helpful!

I spent wayyyyy too long compiling all this - but it's important, and I appreciate you asking!!

Accessibility is a subject near and dear to my heart, and I will say up front that I'm not sure universal (aka accessible to everyone) design is possible, because people's needs can vary even within the same subset of similar disabilities (such as limited vision or blindness). BUT that doesn't mean we don't try to design for and make our games available to as many people as possible. Mismatch by Kat Holmes is a great read on design for accessibility in general, as is Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez. You might also check out literally anything Alice Wong has ever done.

To start, I recommend this article on the Lenses of Accessibility.

(for reference, this article is about web/graphic design, so I'm going to try and distill the most salient points for game design)

We are going to primarily focus on a few of these lenses:

Color

Font

Images & Icons

Layout

Readability

Structure

Keyboard

More details under the cut.

Color

Why does color matter? Well, for starters, there's a lot of colorblind people out there. Contrast affects readability. Autistic people and people who suffer from occular migraines might be affected by particular vivid colors. There's lots of reasons to consider color and the work it is doing in your piece, but in general you can provide a black and white, high contrast version of your game to help users.

There are tools out there to figure out if your contrast meets certain readability standards, such as this one.

Font

Dyslexia and other visual processing issues can make font choice really important. Plus, some fonts really affect readability. Additionally, line height, justification, and size of text can affect readability.

Best practice would be to provide a plain-text version of your game (and beware of "dyslexia-friendly" fonts which may or may not actually help - sticking to a basic readability font like Arial, Tahoma, or Verdana, is safest). I like this style guide for reference.

Images & Icons

For visually-impaired people, it's important to use alt-text, descriptions, and/or captions to help screenreaders properly translate images. Tons and tons of details that could go into this, but there are better people than me to describe it.

Layout

We've talked about this a bit, but there's tons of resources for this. There was recently a great writeup about Yazeba's Bed and Breakfast in terms of layout that I highly recommend.

Readability

More of the thing we've already talked about - it really is a combination of all the other lenses that comes down to readability. Audio versions of your game are always a good way to avoid the restrictions of screen readers, but can be expensive to produce.

Structure

This is tables. Tables are a nightmare for screenreaders, but including them as images can also be a problem. The short solution is "don't use tables" but that's not necessarily great for seeing people. The section in this blog is really great when talking about options for structure.

Keyboard

Debated on whether to include this, but given how many games are being read as purely digital files, I think it's important to have workable interactive elements that can be navigated through without a mouse. Some of that is going to come down to the programs being used to open your files. But if there are things you can do on your end (such as labeling form fillable fields on an interactive character sheet), they're worth doing!

Please understand that this isn't an exhaustive list. There's tons of resources out there and technology and standards are constantly changing.

It's also is important to note that even doing one of these things is helpful. You might look at this list and go "wow that's too hard" but I promise you, it's worth it. My games do not all have accessible versions! That's something I'm trying to rectify. The biggest part of that for me is thinking about accessibility from the start instead of at the end! But we can start today, and that's better than not starting.

The most important thing to remember are that disabled people are NOT a monolith - needs will differ from person to person. Accessible design makes gaming better for everyone!

Final Resources:

Accessibility in InDesign

Accessible-RPG

A11Y

Accessible Design for Teams

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

who do you think is the most realistic abuser between rhysand and tamlin?

Hi anon!!!

I feel like the overblown for Tamlin has a specific function, and so I usually end-up disagreeing with anti-Tamlin (not criticisms, but this particular crowd of people - if you know, you know ) sentiments. First and foremost, Tamlin and Rhys are purposely made into foils; that is, we are supposed to look at their actions and compare – once we get to MAF. In the first book, the story isn’t necessarily trying to make a point about Tamlin, so the ‘red flags’ being pointed out aren’t moments of intentional, tactical abuse.

I don’t think there’s an actual ‘realistic’ way to experience abuse. I don’t think it’s an adequate way to talk about abuse because there isn’t a universal experience with abuse. Everyone’s experience is different! There are signs, and staples that can help people identify abusive partners and/or experiences, but those experiences in and of themselves are unique, as is the response to abuse.  I’ve always thought of Tamlin as a blank canvas that can be imposed upon. He’s abusive, in the fact he does a string of abusive things. He has all the hallmarks of an abuser…but none of the threads that make him feel…like anything more than a canvas, in my opinion. Like – I see how people see their abuser in him, but I also don’t believe he’s a very consistent character. He doesn’t do things for the same reasons, as MaF tries to argue; he also doesn’t act the same between those books. It’s subjective, but character wise he doesn’t stay the same.  I’m sorry, but I genuinely disagree with the way Feyre characterizes Tamlin. If the story argues that Tamlin developed abusive tendencies because of his trauma, great! But like,,,the story tries to argue that he was always like that, and Feyre just never noticed and I just…disagree. I have my issues with Tamlin, naturally, but I think the reason Rhys is much scarier to me, is that he consistently has the same justification, with seemingly no introspection. He gets away with the abuse because he is constantly sympathized with. The only reason I don’t dislike Tamlin is because he faces consequences. Rhys doesn’t. He also does the same abusive things to Feyre in like…every book. He doesn’t have a character arc. So, it’s not realism I’m looking at, but consistency.

The more fruitful question should be consistency. Is the dynamic between Tamlin and Feyre consistent, and my answer to that is no. I don’t believe we get a pattern of abuse that is consistent across the two books Tamlin is heavily featured. Tamlin having anger issues is a characteristic that merely exists, for one, because Tamlin is naturally an adaptation of another character and therefore embodies those characteristics. It’s not to say that Tamlin doesn’t have a particular way of handling trauma (see: violence), but that consistently, Tamlin has always known to remove himself from the general public when he does. We never see him leverage his violence against his peers or Feyre ever – even when Feyre is effectively his prisoner. So while his anger is a consistent character trait, it isn’t a consistent abusive Trait. It’s also…the norm for stress relief in this society (see: Rhys + Cass + Az’s schedule beat downs to ‘calm rhys down’). He’s also never used violence against anyone in the entirety of TaR to ‘calm down.’

This is a change for Rhys, as discussed in a previous post, who actively does consistently leverage violence against Feyre (and his Inner Circle) since his introduction in the first book. Tamlin, as initially characterized, is revulsed so heavily by having to hurt his people, that he physically cannot go through with Amarantha’s curse. He chooses his people. He is disgusted with having to whip Lucien. He physically couldn’t stand what Amarantha did to Lucien’s eye – so much so that he vomited as soon as he saw it. In MaF, this entire dynamic (not just his abuse of Feyre, but of his citizens) becomes of focal point. The story tries to argue that Tamlin would willingly harm his own soldiers, and Lucien, when in the first book he literally stood against Amarantha and refused to participate in the curse, with no power. Tamlin doesn’t allow Feyre to leave the house in MaF, yet in TAR, when Feyre is attacked by those monsters in the forest, Tamlin literally just tells Feyre to be careful when she goes out, he tells her to stay close when he’s not there, and they leave it at that. Tamlin doesn’t ask Feyre ‘what does she want from’, as we established. All I’m saying is there’s no consistency in this behaviour. The story can’t even figure out whether Tamlin has always been like this or has just become like this.

And then my next question become has Tamlin ever leveraged violence against Feyre, prior to the events of MaF – and the answer is no. So not only is it not consistent on a character level, it isn’t even consistent between the dynamic between Feyre and Tamlin. When Tamlin initially falls in love with Feyre, he falls in love with the human girl. He doesn’t want a Lady – he doesn’t even believe he’s going to make it out alive. He falls in love with her because she isn’t just that, and he literally subtly shunned the way his mother would not say anything when his father became a tyrant. He’s essentially telling Feyre he doesn’t want her to be like his mother. So like, even that angle is again, not consistent with what we’ve seen. Snd because of this, people have purposely insert and add things to make him look like a worse character because like there’s nothing in that proves Tamlin is worse than Rhys as the book kind of argues.

[dracaelus]

Do you ever just think about how in Batman The Knight, Bruce mentions they promised to not use guns and yet Bruce is the first one to shoot Luka to protect Khoa? Especially considering his small flashes whenever he had to use guns even at inhuman targets? And he still did it?

YES!!! Yes, I do!!!

I went through this specific issue recently and i have so many thoughts, I hope you don't mind me using your ask as an excuse to ramble :)

Bruce was having such a bad time in this issue it's not even funny. Luka just decided to kill the only constant figure in his life at this point, his partner, his bestie, his boy crush, his only companion, and just expected him to sit and watch while he shot him right in front of his eyes, like, bro, right in front of the traumatized by loved ones being shot in front of him boy??? WHY

And of course that happened after months of him relieving this particular trauma repeatedly on account of having to use guns and interact daily with a guy who, bc of his past career, he couldn't help but compare to his parents' murderer. Why not, after all. Just marinate him a bit before going for the kill.

Obviously, Bruce couldn't let Luka just kill Khoa, so he takes the gun, and he doesn't even kill Luka, but taking that shot was such a difficult thing to do in such a stressful situation in which he's clearly relieving his biggest trauma. And like, sure, he made his promise to Luka, but more than that, guns are forever associated with his parents death and their murderer. Bruce very much can't use guns on real people without shaking, trembling, throwing up, yk, feeling like he's putting himself in the shoes of joe chill and feeling so intensely guilty. It’s really his last resort - if it was Bruce’s life that Luka was threatening, he might even have let himself be killed in order to not have to use the gun.

However, since the universe is not over with him yet, and still has some ideas about how to make his day worse, it decides instead to force his hand by making Minhkhoa be the one being held at gunpoint. Thus, Bruce does take the shot anyway in the worst way possible and in the worst situation ever, and literally the only thing that could've been worse would be making him kill someone, so of course,

THEN

MINHKHOA TAKES THE GUN

AND SHOOTS LUKA RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM

MAKING SO THAT BRUCE'S SHOT REALLY RESULTED IN SOMEONE'S DEATH

ONCE AGAIN

RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIS TRAUMATIZED EYES

and as if this wasn't enough

HE THEN POINTS THE GUN AT BRUCE

Honestly his biggest crime, I don't care about the murders and other felonies, this moment right here is the only thing he ever did wrong.

Like, can you imagine the level of brain damage bruce was receiving that day?

Khoa went from loved-one-about-to-be-killed to being the one walking on joe chill's shoes. His range, honestly. No wonder Bruce got so mad and then so heartbroken. Crying his eyes out, literally hugging himself. The saddest, most traumatized boy ever

Anyways, bruce still misses him, even after all khoa put him through. Or, as he says, he misses who he thought he was. After their first breakup khoa's image took a lot of damage - bruce really starts to wonder if khoa wasn't just a monster and he was the only one not seeing it. He thinks minhkhoa is sabotaging him, and that he might have killed alfred and his ex-girlfriend.

But of course nothing of this it's true and Khoa manages to undo some of the damage to bruce's opinion of him by trying to warn him about the guy actually sabotaging and trying to kill both of them (he also almost dies in the process, which i'm sure made him seem extra harmless and babygirly to bruce), so i guess that was enough to take away the thoughts of khoa being very likely to kill him one day.

He also offers a justification for the two murders he committed (Luka and master Ouahbi - honestly, what's the deal with all those criminals/ex criminals being both so good at diagnosing people with psychopathy and hating them so much????), and it was good enough for bruce, i guess? Tbh, he was mostly just trying to not think too deeply about it, 'cause he just wanted to have a little more time with him so badly. He would do so many things for khoa, and forgive him for so much stuff. HOW COULD KHOA FUMBLE HIM SO BADLY-

One thing I think about a lot is how in btk #7, bruce’s broken heart is addressed - he only references his trauma with his parents death in the issue, but the last issue ended with him saying his heart was broken bc of khoa so we can infer that he’s thinking about what happened between the two of them too. I find it interesting how this seems to be bruce’s way of dealing with khoa - he doesn't talk about him. Dick mentions it in Batman (2016) #104

And bruce never says a word about what happened between him and khoa to zatanna

I wonder if this is his way of keeping khoa with him. As he says, his heart never heals bc he doesn't let it - and so, he never talks about khoa, he only talks with zatanna about the loss of his parents, and he tells dick some of the bad khoa did to him, but doesn't delve into how important he was to him, or the good times they spent together, or how willing he was and still is to forgive him (tho he ends up showing him this part anyways when he goes to ghostmaker to ask him to coparent batman inc. with him when he first started it). He tells their story in a way that makes it seem like their separation didn't affect him negatively at all - dick only realizes bruce still misses him bc of his super powers of seeing right through bruce’s emotional barriers. But bruce keeps refusing to talk about khoa, or adress the ways in which he is still hurting, so he nevers gets better, and thus, khoa is still with him in a way, if only in wounds he left behind.

I also think bruce focuses a lot on everything bad khoa did to him and tries so hard to not even think about the good parts of their relationship bc the truth is, in his heart, the good outweighs the bad by a lot. Which is the reason why khoa barely has to do anything to win him back every time he comes back - bc despite everything, bruce has always been way too willing to forgive him for everything, and all he really has to do is to come back, and be willing to stay for a little while longer.

[bonefall]

Since the ask box commands to vote Bumble in that tourament (which I did, cuz she was SCREWED over to the extreme) could you talk a whole lot about BB!Bumble's dyspraxia? Since we are talking about the *everything in canon* she got for the High Crime of being a fat foreigner woman and abuse victm in warrior cats, let's talk about the universe where we add disabled to her list of High Crimes but she isnt done dirty as balls(sorry if all this is worded weird)

Plus, I'm personally having issues writing a dyspraxic character (mostly because i kinda suck at absorbing information about things like disability when not using characters as exemples) and you've really helped me in the past with making characters with BPD, so it would be personally useful in character making

(Sorry if I'm rude, I deeply respect your work and it greatly inspires me, especially Clanmew)

All righty! BB!Bumble's dyspraxia!

First off, for newcomers;

WHY I ADDED DYSPRAXIA TO BUMBLE

In canon, Bumble is called a fat, useless kittypet, before being dragged back to her domestic abuser. She then dies while trying to survive on her own, starved to the point of emaciation before Clear Sky murders her.

A very common fandom response to this is essentially, "shes NOT useless! She could hunt/fight if you taught her!" And a lot of AUs will have her survive, learning how to be Truly Useful with all the same skills as everyone else.

I won't lie; I think that's very disappointing.

You're not refuting the rotten heart of this ideology, you're just doing what DOTC already does with Jagged Peak. You're AGREEING. You're saying she WOULD be useless if she couldn't hunt or fight like a wild cat, giving her Coolgirl Badass moments to haha embarass her bigots, and Actually the only problem here is that they didn't give her a chance.

What if they GAVE her that chance, and she COULDN'T hunt or fight like them? Would it be okay to send the battered housewife back to her domestic abuser? Hopefully fucking not!

Let's be frank; None of the groups in DOTC are starving. Not even after the prey sickness pandemic.

"Starvation Rhetoric" is an excuse, only ever rolled out by monsters like Clear Sky as justification for stealing land, murder, and throwing out cats the groups deem unworthy of life.

Yet, this gets rolled out for Bumble specifically, by the MOOR CATS, who are supposed to be opposing his ideology.

And that's where I'm starting from.

Okay. What if she couldn't perform physically like other cats?

What if she was part of a group that DID have real concerns about not having enough food?

How does Bumble herself cope with her feelings, and her desire to help her friends and contribute to a group that loves her?

Let's go through all that, and attack the heart of the idea. In fact, we're going to be doing a lot of it, with a significant portion of early ThunderClan being disabled cats.

(Thunder Storm has three legs. Bright Storm has asthma. Sunlit Frost loses the use of both front paws and ends up with chronic pain.)

Bumble's Dyspraxia

The first thing to know about dyspraxia (or DCD, Developmental Coordination Disorder) is that it comes in a LOT of different forms. The next thing to know is that it's RIDICULOUSLY common. Some estimates say 5% of the population has it-- 1 in 20 people.

It's heavily associated with autism and ADHD. The "classic" symptoms are general clumsiness and motor control issues, like having a hard time tying shoes. But these are also symptoms of dyspraxia;

Short-term memory issues, but not long-term

Being constantly covered in bumps and bruises

Having a hard time telling lefts and rights

Difficulties holding pencils or writing in general

"Wobbliness" including tripping mid-step or tripping over your own feet

Issues in the acquisition of "muscle memories," being slow to acquire physical skills.

Stuttering and taking long pauses before responding to someone else speaking

Most dyspraxics won't have all of these, these are symptoms. Not a checklist.

My partner describes theirs as like "constantly working with cold hands through a layer of gloves." The stiffness of being in a freezer, paired with the general delay of having a cover over your skin.

Mine is more focused on the mental side, acquiring new skills is unnaturally difficult, my reaction time is delayed, and I stumble into things.

Every person with dyspraxia is different, but what links us is that we're uncoordinated. We can't help it, telling us to try harder or pay more attention doesn't work. We aren't being careless-- our brains don't send signals to our bodies properly.

I'm basing Bumble's off my own. Her mate, Turtle Heart, shows her over and over how to hunt. It never sticks. She tries to pick up battle moves from Thunder Storm to help defend herself from Clear Sky's goons. It doesn't work.

She's really trying, she really is. The Moor group quickly loses patience with her, and Bumble is well aware that she's only tolerated on Turtle Heart's vouch. Her worst fears come true when Tom steals their children, and her mate is killed trying to retreive them.

That messes with her, and makes her believe that she really is worthless and a burden.

ThunderClan was FOUNDED on Thunder Storm's fury, breaking off his supporters to retreive her from exile, and Bumble's struggle with self-worth begins in earnest.

There's one thing she's confident about, and really loves. Bumble is trilingual, outgoing, and confident in her ability to talk to others. That's what she can add, and what she wants to do.

ThunderClan is different. It works with every strength and weakness of its members, and values diplomacy to keep it afloat against the odds. Bumble really is needed, but eventually even her translation work becomes less special as more kits grow up bilingual. Eventually, this too feels taken from her.

And then it's back to square one. Her mate is gone, one of her kits betrayed her, Owl Eyes is a big strong man who doesn't need his mum anymore. She's left with her fumbling paws, taking more from the pile than she puts in.

One can only hope she realizes that ThunderClan was born out of love for her. That it was never about what she could add. She didn't have to confront it in the main story because so much was happening, but as peace settles over the forest, it's time for her to start to unpack that idea.

[stranded-cryptid]

So there's a lot of Porter hate this season (with justification) it's really easy to try to 1:1 the bad kids experiences onto our own, especially this season. This season has been more down to earth and real, so having a teacher who doesn't teach in a way that feels helpful, but actively upsets you and makes things feel harder is.. pretty universal.

We all hate that guy. He sucked. (Even when he ended up sometimes helping, we never stopped disliking him, and I suspect he was fine with that)

But a couple things.

1.This isn't a math class, or a language class, or history studies, or really anything that can come from a book. This is a barbarian class. Where they teach you to be barbaric. And the key point of success in this class is your rage.

So Porter isn't there to make Gorgug feel good or safe or supported, he is there to make Gorgug feel enraged, and to learn to trust that rage and his reasons behind it. Because, and I cannot stress this enough, GORGUG IS NOT SAFE.

HE DIED ON THE FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL. This is an ADVENTURING Academy, where they teach you how to win, not how to live with yourself after.

And 2. (The reason I actually made this post) The whole reason Fig became suspicious of Porter in the first place is because he wasn't surprised by the scene in the cafeteria.

My siblings, he probably has the alert feat. (Actually, Brennan was probably remembering something from 3.5. He asked for a "bluff" check, not deception, either that episode or the one before). Point being, he cannot be surprised. It was a little ability nod, not a conspiracy.

All that said, they made the fucking vulture important, so, is Porter evil now? Fig has willed it into being so like... Maybe?

[total-drama-brainrot]

Total Drama Psycho Noah AU, what if Sierra (who knew everything about everybody) tried to warn Heather + Alejandro NOT to mess with Noah, cause he's a total psychopath (but they don't believe her) ... Sierra doesn't have to worry about Cody getting hurt, cause he's a sweet boy, and Noah only hurts people that attack him first... What if after Heather + Alejandro later learns the truth, Sierra simply tells the duo: "I told you so..." 😒

You're so right about Sierra being one of the few who's In The Know about p!Noah (without his express input), thanks to her superfan status.

Sierra throws a bit of a wrench into this whole AU, really. Because there'd need to be justification for her either not saying anything about Noah's true colours, or having the others not believe her claims about Noah despite it being abundantly clear that her knowledge on them is pretty infallible.

But.

Playing in to the whole 'obsessive superfan' thing, Sierra wouldn't want to jeopardise the ruse Noah's so carefully crafted if he were, say, one of her favourite characters.

Because Noah (every version of Noah) is a fairly private person, all things considered. She doesn't have a lot of information to go off of- not in comparison to the fountain of knowledge she has about the rest of the cast, at least- but she does know that he must be keeping his true colours a secret for a reason. Would you want to ruin someone's carefully laid web of deception when it's been one of the most entertaining aspects of the show thus far?

Or.

You could take it down another route, and have Sierra outright dislike Noah because he's A Danger to her beloved cast, but have this dislike become evident before she can warn the others; Sierra's pretty crazy herself, so the cast would dismiss her warnings are her trying to rally them against the person she so clearly hates instead of a genuine effort to keep them safe. After all, wouldn't it be in character for someone as evidently unstable as Sierra to lie and spread 'baseless rumours' about the person she clearly despises?

(That second option's fun, because it adds an aspect of dramatic irony for the audience both in-universe and IRL; they/we know that Sierra's right, so her struggle to be listened to would be almost Cassandra-esque.)

Either way, she'd make a point of staying as far away as possible from Noah. Because Sierra (like the rest of the in-universe audience) are working under the impression that Noah's a ticking time-bomb, a constant threat of incredible violence against the cast, since that's exactly what Noah painted himself as during his confessionals. (Speaking of confessionals, I do have a justification as to why the contestants eliminated before Noah are also unaware of his unhingedness, that I'll cover in it's own post.) That's not entirely true, of course; Noah's a psychopath with a grimdark sense of humour, sure, but he's not about to start randomly attacking people in bouts of spontaneous hysteria- but the audience, and therefore Sierra, don't have the comfort of that little tidbit of information.

It all circles back to Noah being a private person. He holds his cards close to his chest; in this case, the audience knows what he's capable of, but they don't know that a lot of his Baby Craves Violence act is just that- an act. A joke he's pulling on the viewing world, that he admittedly gets a little too into to. The perils of being dedicated to the bit. Not that he doesn't have the occasional urge to commit felonies and acts of brutality against others, but he's got enough self-control to redirect that energy into causing less destructive chaos (most of the time).

-

So when his true colours are eventually revealed? Sierra is so vindicated, she almost forgets the danger (she thinks) she's in. Almost.

(In the context of the second option;) She's spent the majority of the season thus far warning the others against Noah, only to have her good intentions brushed aside time and time again (which, ouch! Imagine trying to help the people you idolise enough to literally stalk throw your concern for their safety back in your face) by their incredulity. Being proven to have been in the right the entire time would be a power trip and a half, because it'd validate her skills as the unofficial-official expert on all things Total Drama and she'd get to shove the consistent rebuffs back in the others' faces.

It's a shame she'd be so dead-set on disliking Noah on principle, because the two of them could be great friends. If Sierra had a stronger craving for chaos and disorder, she could form a Terror Trio with Noah and Izzy.

[that-ari-blogger]

An Interesting Character

Usually, when character is brought up in discussion, it is in reference to the people. If you think of the characters of The Owl House for example, you probably think of Luz, Eda, Bellos, Hunter, and Principal Bump.

But, by pure mechanics, a character is just a force at work in a story. One with personality, and agency, sure, but it's just a force.

This means that, if you squint a little, the Boiling Isles itself is a character, and the Wild Magic is an extension of that. It certainly gets treated like a character by the story, especially in Adventures In Elements.

Let me explain.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Before I start, let me give one attempt to argue with the pedants. By definition, a character is a person. So, hear me out, the Boiling Isles is literally the body of a titan, who actively talks to Luz later on in the series. That is my justification.

So... why is wild magic a thing?

I'm not asking for an in-universe answer, because that is multifaceted and not really the point. I'm asking why the writers decided to include this idea, and what effect it has on the story?

The phrase "magic is..." is used four times in this episode. Once by Eda, and thrice in quick succession by Luz. And it is worth taking a look at these statements.

"I know my lessons seem weird, but this is what wild magic is all about! Making a connection with nature. The earliest witches understood that. Human witches need to understand it, too. You wanna learn a second spell? ... Then you have to learn from the island."

There is a lot going on with Eda's guidance. First up is the small detail about the tense. The earliest witches knew that magic is about nature, implying now it is different. But mainly, this is an explanation of the nitty gritty of The Owl House's magic system. It's about two things, nature and connection. And I want to delve into that a little bit.

There is something fascinating about Bellos and his roots in witch-hunting. Because that was specifically defined by an opposition to things, rather than any actual views of its own.

Malleus Maleficarum, the book that kicked off the witch-hunts is a fascinating read, as long as you understand what it is that you are reading and don't use it as a set of instructions. Internet Archive has a translated version by Prof. Christopher S. Mackay, complete with commentary from latter authors that I highly recommend.

This single book caused a ton of harm to people, and you can examine it from almost any angle you like. The original was written by a terrible person with terrible intentions, and I also recommend Overly Sarcastic Productions' video on Werewolves for more information on that section of history.

What I want to focus on is the vernacular. References "devils" about 400 times and namedrops "witches" with similar regularity. The word "demon" comes up over 1000 times, and the word "pagan" comes up about 40 times. Specifically in reference to "pagan nations" which is about as racist as it sounds, as well as a ton of using the word as a catch all insult ("x type of person is worse than a pagan", etc. etc.). I don't want to get into the theology and history of this word, because it's a complicated minefield. But in this context, specifically around Europe in this time period, it means just about all regional faiths and mythologies. Celtic, Norse, Germanic, and several others.

Fun fact about me, I am Welsh, which means is that I have a connection to Welsh mythology, and so my analysis of wild magic is through that lens. If you have an understanding of other similar cultures, let me know, I'm fascinated to learn how that affects the reading of the Owl House.

Now, Modern Druidism is a living religion that I am not well versed in and want to treat with the respect befitting any living faith. So, I am sticking to what I know about the history and mythology and trying to make the differentiation between those two and Modern Druidism clear.

So, Druids in Celtic mythology are religious leaders, and peacekeepers. But what is possibly the most famous thing about them is their connection to nature. And here is where the analysis of The Owl House comes into play. Because the Owl House takes great care to associate magic with the natural, and Bellos with the unnatural.

"It means magic is a gift from the island. It means magic is everywhere. Magic is everywhere!"

Bellos creates artificial magic through his artificial staff and the destruction of the Palismen to fuel his life. Hunter wields an artificial staff, and in Adventures In Elements, Amity trains with an artificial training wand, which is linked to Bellos through the coven system.

But you would think that Luz's runes would also count as artificial. So what gives?

This episode shows them as part of nature more than the more refined spell circles. Luz's magic is that connection to the island in its purest, rawest form, and as I have said before, Luz's greatest strength is her ability to connect.

The dynamic between Wild Magic and Coven Magic isn't a dynamic between the artificial and the natural, it's a dynamic between empathy and utilitarianism. Wild Magic borrows, or is gifted, Coven magic takes and uses for its own ends. They are similar concepts, but it's in the minutia that the meaning comes out.

Final Thoughts

There is one final thing that Wild Magic reminds me of, and its off on a limb a bit. I currently live in Australia, and while Aboriginal spirituality is varied and complex and not my story to tell, I have been gifted this piece of advice that I would like to share: Humans don't own the land, we are a part of it, just as the trees and the beasts and the storms and the fires. Humans are mere custodians, our duty is to watch over and protect, and to connect.

I thought that was relevant.

I am away next week, but I'll be back in the new year with some analysis of The First Day, so stick around if that interests you.

Previous - Next

[couldtransitionsaveher]

"DIGGER" HARKNESS/CAPTAIN BOOMERANG from SUICIDE SQUAD: KILL THE JUSTICE LEAGUE

JUSTIFICATION:

"Throughout the game he gets repeatedly dunked on for propping up his self-image with self-aggrandising behaviour and trying to look cooler, to the point of one dialogue literally saying that (according to king shark) he smells of shame, self-loathing, fear, and body odour. (the BO is machismo, according to Boomerang)

Then, during the course of the game, the team gets thrown into another universe much like their own except the alien invasion was not fought off. The only other human there actually mentions a "Lady Boomerang", questioning why Captain Boomerang is dressed as her, and speaking of her VERY fondly.

This is like. One universe over. With a female Captain Boomerang who apparently dressed like the male one and was pleasant enough to be remembered fondly (which the male one...hes a dick and i love him for it okay). also Lady Boomerang when Captain is gender neutral sounds a lot to me like "trans woman just figured it out and is very excited"

tldr instead of "alcohol and misbehaviour" he should try estrogen about his problems" - Anonymous

Reminder: Submissions are always open! Submit here!

[grimgiggles]

Sigh.

I dislike jumping into discourses as contentious and subjective and BIG as the discourse over Ludinus' conversation with BH in the last episode, but there is a point that I haven't seen anyone making (idk, maybe people have been making it and I just haven't seen it) about his side of the argument, and I think it's worth consideration.

Ludinus values being right over being good.

Most people are thinking one of two things right now:

1. Yes, obviously, so?

2. What's the difference?

Let me put it another way: Ludinus values being correct over being kind. To him, Truth is more important than Compassion. He is the kind of person for whom a hard, blunt truth is a greater expression of love than any expression of softness or gentleness that is not 100% true. I hope that clarifies it.

At this point I want to make it clear that nothing that follows is a justification of Ludinus' actions, or an attempt to make him more sympathetic or anything. This is all exposition and analysis, on my part.

So, when I listened to his conversation with BH, I did not hear him trying to justify his own actions while condemning the gods' very same actions, and I didn't hear him trying to deflect blame for the wrongs he has done or that others have done for him. He admitted that he had done much wrong in pursuit of his goal. He knows the (many different) kinds of people he works with. He knows that there are parallels between him and his enemies (the gods), he KNOWS that he isn't the Good Guy (none of this matters to him). Every time it sounded (because that's what people expected to hear) like he was defending himself, what I heard was factual correction. He wants people to get their details straight. Because that's Truth.

But he believes, he KNOWS (and we don't know if he's right or wrong) that if he accomplishes his goals, everyone in the world will be, on balance, better off for it. For him, this is a labor of love (and sure, it's also motivated by hatred for the gods born from trauma, the two things aren't mutually exclusive). It's a very non-personal, universal - you could even say clinical - kind of love, but it is love.

But (and I know this from experience) it is SO difficult to convey earnest conviction and humility at the same time. It is almost impossible to say "I know I've hurt people and I know that's bad but I swear I swear I SWEAR I am doing this FOR you please LISTEN to me" without coming across exactly the way that Ludinus does: as a villain trying to justify himself. And he knows this, so he doesn't bother trying to make himself look like the Good Guy (again, he doesn't care about being Good, he cares about being Right), even while he DOES try to present his case in a way that he hopes will be understood.

He IS a villain, to be clear.

He has fallen into the classic INTJ villain trap (whaaaat meyers-briggs? In my meta? BTW this is a legitimate mbti stereotype, it's kind of messed up), which goes:

1. The INTJ experiences grief.

2. The INTJ identifies the cause of their suffering as a universal cause of suffering.

3. The INTJ processes their grief by intellectualizing it and devising a way to eliminate the cause of suffering completely, forever. They see this as not only personally cathartic but an act of service to everyone.

4. The INTJ gets tunnel vision about their goals.

5. The INTJ's methods hurt people, which forms an opposition to their goals.

6. Attempts at peaceful resolution fail because the INTJ is usually quite bad at connecting to people and making themselves understood on an emotional level (despite usually being very good at understanding, at least on a surface level, the motivations of others), and most other people simply don't even realize that they are not understanding.

7. One party or the other succeeds, usually with disastrous fallout for both sides. The only way to prevent this is to make a strong personal emotional connection with the INTJ - which is extremely difficult because the grief back in step 1 caused them to retreat WAY behind walls of Intellect, Pragmatism, and Cynicism - and through that connection remind them that actually the ends don't justify the means.

The other thing that makes Ludinus a villain is that he wants to commit genocide (technically he wants to enable genocide). He wants to eliminate an entire population of entities who are, he even conceded himself, basically just people. And he's okay with that, because it will, in his mind, be a net benefit for everyone else, and because in a truly wild subversion, he sees the gods as less than people. His hatred of the gods has morphed in his mind into a weird doctrine of mortal supremacism. He may or may not (personally I'm leaning toward probably not) be Correct about what will happen if he succeeds, but he is Wrong either way.

I digress. I veered a little off my point there, just to make it absolutely clear that I do not agree with Ludinus. He is a Bad Guy who must be Stopped.

We just saw step 6 fail, predictably, because BH and Ludinus spent the whole time talking at cross-purposes. Imogen probably got closest to actually communicating meaningfully with him, with her line of questioning on Predathos, but she didn't get very far because he has no reason to trust her with everything he knows. They were just fishing for more information, and he was just fishing for angles to hook a vessel.

My point is this: that conversation in Aeor was nothing. BH did not score any points, and neither did Ludinus (although he came pretty close with his little trick with Delilah, and he got away with the orb). Neither party came any closer to actually understanding the other or making themselves understood.

All these posts going around celebrating how BH "got him" or whatever are completely.

Misunderstanding.

Ludinus.

And so is BH.

[eddo-tensei]

The Power of Love according to Season 5 of Miraculous

Something disturbing dawned on me concerning...a lot of the development in Season 5 and it comes down to one thing: Love.

At first, Andre and Felix getting redeemed while Chloe gets sent off to the worst fate the show would allow didn't make a lot of sense. The only thing I could get from the writers was just that "Chloe bad, so everyone else good." It was stupid, but it wasn't insidious. At least, not that insidious at first. And then the finale with Gabriel happened and while it took me a while to process my frustrations with this, something finally clicked. Not only concerning that, but some of the other developments I've seen.

Felix getting another chance to the point of JOINING the heroes in the new universe seemed like nonsense until you look at what happened before that. He was someone who Astruc went out of his way to bury in the narrative and was exclusively causing trouble for everyone up to and including GENOCIDE...until he showed his love to Kagami. Suddenly, his actions are seen as righteous and his backstory of being abused by his father was justification for his actions. You see, he loved Kagami and he also apparently loved Adrien too because they were "the same."

Andre was basically just some corrupt politician who was also a pathetic snob. Then when Zoe came in, we suddenly get all of these humanizing bits about how Chloe totally mistreated him (because apparently, not having the guts to say no to your daughter is mistreatment) and when he divorced Audrey, he gets Zoe because he's someone he could be happy with. A true familial love unlike the one he had with Chloe.

Chloe, meanwhile, doesn't love anyone as far as the writers are concerned. Any genuine connection she might have in either the platonic, familial, or the romantic sense, whether it'd be to Adrien, Sabrina, Zoe or Ladybug, are shown to be either fake or so utterly shallow, it doesn't count as "love." With that, everything she does is absolutely reprehensible and doesn't deserve a shred of forgiveness even if it's clear she's a neglected child who needed help. BUT, because she "doesn't love anyone", she doesn't get redemption and deserves to be sent away with a parent who doesn't love her either. Same with Lila, she doesn't love anyone at all and in fact, just jumps from family to family purely to keep up her manipulations.

Finally, we have Gabriel, who had done nothing but sheltered, belittled, and outright ABUSED Adrien as well as commit a multitude of horrid crimes throughout the series. His actions constantly escalated in awfulness throughout the series, even showing that he doesn't care if he destroys the universe to get what he wants. Yet there was always this trait he possessed. His love for Emilie and that ended up coming to the forefront in the finale. Marinette, who had Gabriel dead to rights, decided at the last moment to try and appeal to his humanity because she knows he loved Emilie and in her mind, that love is enough grounds for her to offer him one chance to step up and help. Then when Gabriel opts to betray Marinette and starts the wish, he tells her at the last moment to try and help Adrien remember all of the times he "tried to be a good father," which is apparently an indicator that he actually LOVED Adrien too. THAT ended up being why Marinette decided to lie about Gabriel by saying he died fighting Monarch and went as far as to try and tell Adrien to remember him as a good man. All because she knew Gabriel "loved" him.

This tells me something distressing. Now, the concept of "Love Redeems" is something I'm not at all against and is in fact common in a lot of stories I like. However, it's what Miraculous does with this concept in Season 5 that angers me. The message of Miraculous ends up giving in its grand finale for the Agreste arc isn't that love can help people find the way to kindness. It's that anything you do can be justified as long as you do it for "love." It doesn't matter if you purposely get a cab driver in trouble, attempt to sabotage a date that your crush is in, put together a project that tries to commercialize air, betray someone to help a terrorist, commit genocide, cause untold amounts of damage to your town and beyond, or even destroy the universe! As long as you love someone, everything you do can be justified. Except when we decide that you don't love ANYONE, then we'll do everything in our power to show that all of your connections don't count as love so you can have the worst punishment we could possibly muster. Regardless of intent, that's how the writers ended up describing the Power of Love in Season Five of Miraculous and that's wretched to me.

[princess-of-the-corner]

Apparently Astruc went out of his way to make Lila unlovable. Comparison to characters we're meant to sympathize with:

Gabriel started the entire mess because he couldn't try and just ask for help to the guy he knew could help (and this is before using a Miraculous selfishly for months fried his morals and basic decency). He later manipulated two teenage girls, one of which he knew since she was a child, into terrorism, destroyed Hong Kong by accident, and pulled a stunt that brainwashed the President of the United States into firing the nukes (and once the order is given it cannot be countermandered) AND the world's strongest woman into shattering the Moon (and while it's vaguely possible humanity could survive a nuclear exchange, the loss of the Moon would spell the end of all life on Earth).

Tomoe was infertile... So rather than adopt a heir (a rather common occurrence in Japanese society) she borrowed a magical jewel that manipulates one of the concepts that make the universe work to clone herself.

Emilie was also infertile, so she used the above jewel to make a gender-inverted clone of herself, and somehow BROKE said jewel in the process, sentencing herself to a slow death. She then proceeded to be an abusive parent and used her husband as scapegoat, and let her brother in law borrow the jewel to make himself a son (though this could count as a good deed given the jackass).

Colt Phatom had an infertile wife, so rather than adopt he borrowed his sister-in-law magic brooch and made a gender-inverted clone OF HIS WIFE, and was an abusive parent to said clone. I'm feeling ill...

Felix discovered his uncle is a terrorist wielding two jewels that manipulates two concepts that make the universe work... And rather than tell the squadron of superheroes about it, he robbed said superheroes of their magic jewels and traded them for the one that made him and could unmake him (and I'm still surprised Gabriel didn't just Thanos Snap him and steal everything. He then tried to wipe out humanity to protect beings like himself. Though he get something of a justification in that he's a teenager AND raised by Colt Phatom (for all their flaws, Gabriel, Emilie and Tomoe didn't mess their magic children nearly as bad).

Audrey is just plain mean, and so petty she got Akumatized from getting a spot in the second row (I'm willing to forgive Gabriel this one for the sheer hilarity. Plus he had been obviously waiting for years to get avenge all the victims of that bitch).

But the one meant to be unlovable is Lila. Ok.

So like.

This is honestly a point I brought up before, though it was more on a 'why are people more willing to give other characters redemption arcs instead of Lila?'

But yeah for as absolutely fucking awful as these other characters can be, they do have some very basic good traits and someone they care about! Chloé has the toxic af family and genuinely cares about Adrien and Sabrina and her parents. Gabe may be all kinds of fuck, but there was a point in Season 1-3 where we believed he cared about Adrien and he's doing all this because he loves his wife(even if that love is also toxic af). Felix is also a 'he was abused which explains his mindset' and he's shown genuine love for his mother. Tomoe has been shown to care about Kagami, despite everything. Emilie is up in the air but she's presented as loving.

Lila..... has absolutely nothing. Nothing that can be pointed at as some explanation for why she's like this, or proof that there's any hope for her to be 'good'. We don't know her real backstory or what she wants. Every character she's interacted with is just a mark for her cons that she doesn't have any care about, even her 'mothers'.