#he was mentioned in my autism diagnosis | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

Visit Blog

Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.

Fun Fact

The Tumblr office adopted Tommy, an 11-year-old Pomeranian.

#he was mentioned in my autism diagnosis

waywardducks · 8 months

Text

Incorrect bat family quotes but as things me and my sibling have done/said.

Jason: *just trying to read* *feels an eery presence just watching him.*

Damien and Tim: *both just starting at him*

Jason: Yes? Can I help you?

Tim: Slushies

Jason: okay?

Damien: Take us to them.

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

Dick: *Chilling in his bed*

Cass: *very slowly opening the door to his room*

Both: *just stare at each other for an uncomfortable amount of time*

Dick: Please, child. What is it? I can't handle this suspense.

Cass: *quietly* I have a pool party today…

Dick: okay? I'm glad for you.

Cass: …

Cass: Can you go buy me tampons?

Dick:

Dick: Of fucking course I can go buy you tampons! *already jumping out of bed* What size?

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

Damien: *angry, slamming doors, punching walls, screaming at everyone*

Tim: Autism is one hell of a bitch

Dick: Tim, no

Jason: No, no, he's got a point. We really should get him checked out.

Damien: I CAN HEAR YOU

*he was diagnosed with autism the following month*

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

Stephaine: *putting makeup on Cass* almost done!

Tim: we need to hurry, the movie is starting soon

Stephanie: It's fine, we have plenty of time, now let me do your makeup.

Dick: What are y'all doing? Why is everything… pink?

Cass: We are going to watch Barbie

Dick: Can I come?

Steph: Nah it's girls night?

Dick: Then why is Tim going?

Steph: He's one of the girls, obviously.

Tim: Yeah, obviously.

Dick: *crying* I wanna be one of the girls too

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

Bruce: Hey, Tim

Tim: Yeah? What's up?

Bruce: Remember how you're therapist mention she thought you might have ASD?

Tim: Yeah, she said she wasn't %100 percent sure on it though.

Bruce: Well she just sent me a document confirming your diagnosis.

Tim:

Dick: Woah dude! Congrats on the tism!

Jason: Welcome to the spectrum little bro!

Damien: Is Dick the only one that isn't ASD?

Dick: *is sad bc he's left out of the club again*

- ✨✨✨✨✨✨

Dick, Tim, Jason and Damien: *driving down the road at 4 in the morning, blasting fnaf songs at full volume* IVE GOT NO TIME!! I've GOT NO TIME TO LIVE

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

Tim: Jason. I'm bi

Jason: Okay

Tim: Okay? That's all you have to say?

Jason: damn Tim, tf you want be to say? Sorry?

Tim: No! I just thought-

Jason: If you have boy problems go to Dick. He's the one with the most experience in that field.

Dick: Hey! I resent that!

Jason: Oh please, you can call yourself straight all you want but you and both know you've what kinda person you were when you first became Nightwing.

Dick: I wasn't gay Jason I was a slut its different.

Jason: sure, okay.

-✨✨✨✨✨✨

I'm gonna make this a series lmao. Being in a house with 6 kids gives you a lot of stories.

Also, yes, 3 of my younger siblings are officially diagnosed with autism. (Damien and my sister are literally the same person. I have so many headcanons about it, it's not even funny. She even has the same insane art skills, I'm terrified of how fast she learned to do things I've been in school for years to learn)

#stephanie brown #batman #bruce wayne #tim drake #dick grayson #dc comics #jason todd #cassandra cain #duke thomas #incorrect batfamily quotes #batfam #nightwing #red hood #red robin #robin

535 notes · View notes

filmmakerdreamst · 4 months

Text

P.J.Hogan's 'Peter Pan' is still an underrated masterpiece 20 years later

Peter Pan is a live-action fantasy adventure film directed by P. J. Hogan that reimagines the classic story of Peter and Wendy. The screenplay was written by P. J. Hogan and Michael Goldenberg and was released in cinemas in December 2003. The screenplay is based on the 1904 play Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Upand the classic novel Peter Pan by J.M.Barrie, which was originally published under the title Peter and Wendy.

The film tells the story of a young Edwardian girl, Wendy Darling (Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her two younger brothers John and Michael. On the night she is told she must grow up, a wild, fairy-like boy called Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter) flies into her room with his high-maintenance fairy Tinkerbell. When he learns that she tells stories, he whisks Wendy and her two brothers away to a magical Island called Neverland — where you supposedly don’t “grow up” — so that she can mother his henchmen, the Lost Boys. There she fights pirates led by the evil Captain Hook (Jason Isaacs), meets mermaids, dances with fairies, falls in love and grows up.

I have strong family connections tied to Peter and Wendy and J.M.Barrie. My great, great uncle Nico was one of the sons of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies'. He and his other brothers "the Lost Boys" were adopted by J.M.Barrie; which ultimately inspired him to write Peter Pan. Nico’s daughter Laura — my cousin — who I met for the first time a few years ago, told me that she was flown to Australia for the filming of P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan because she was J.M.Barrie’s goddaughter. She told me that she was thrilled with the cast, especially Jason Isaacs, who played Captain Hook and Mr Darling. She also mentioned that Jeremy Sumpter, who played Peter Pan, was a lovely boy. However, she said she was very surprised and sad that the film wasn’t a big success as she really liked what they did with the story. I have loved the fairytale of Peter Pan from a young age, and learning that I am literally part of the family that inspired the story was very exciting and I’ve only begun to internalise it more as I’ve grown older.

When I was in my mid-twenties, I was diagnosed with a high level of Autism. One of my main symptoms was labelled “ageless”, which in simple terms means that one half of me is still a child that I can’t mentally leave behind. I can’t do many things that most adults can do, such as pay bills, drive a car, look after my own well being etc. I flap my hands when I get excited. I bounce. I sometimes speak in a baby voice. I overcommit to things I enjoy. I admit that it was hard to come to terms with the diagnosis when I first received it. But over time, I’ve come to believe that the two can coexist in a healthy way. I believe that I am an adult who is able to develop and grow while still carrying the child within me, and that this is not seen as a bad thing. I think Peter and Wendy can be seen as a reflection of that.

I was first introduced to P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan a few years after it was released (I was maybe nine or ten years old), and I absolutely loved it. It wasn’t only one of my favourite film adaptations, but one of my favourite movies of all time. What surprised me most about the film at that age was how dark and gruesome it was, and full of this underlying sexual tension that I hadn’t expected at all from Peter Pan. Even today, this film still has a special place in my heart. It is made with so much passion and love for the original text that I can automatically put myself back into the story. After watching the film again as an adult, I almost immediately opened my copy of Peter and Wendy and started reading. I would even go so far as to say that I prefer the film to the book. However, part of me wishes that the age rating had been set much higher, as the dark and gruesome moments were some of the strongest parts of the film adaptation. This is possibly why some critics and viewers had difficulty categorising the film at the time.

However, I often consider P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to be the same equivalent as Joe Wright’s Pride and Prejudice. (which came out a few years later in 2005, starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen). The film moves at the same dreamlike pace. It is light, dark, colourful and deeply romantic.

I also often prefer P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to the 1953 Disney Animation of the same name, even though it’s the version I grew up with and liked. I find it much less straightforward and innocent. Also, the 2003 film is much closer to the original source material, which I loved reading as a teenager, and to J.M.Barrie’s original vision. The film manages to reflect the same intellectual subtext and depth of the novel while retaining the whimsy and magic.

Magical Realism

Peter Pan was a perfect blend of fantasy and realism. A lot of media these days focus too much on “realism” and make their sets and CGI look bland and washed out. It’s a common myth these days that no one likes whimsy anymore; it’s somehow seen as too childish. As a result, much of the magic of fantasy is lost. But in this Peter Pan, a lot of colour was used in the set design and cinematography. Everything was so brightly and colourfully lit. Most fantasy films these days, including the new live-action adaptation of Peter Pan and Wendy on Disney+, are all so gloomy and dark. You almost have to light up the screen to make out the actors’ facial expressions or what’s happening in the scene. But this film understands that a viewer who watches fantasy wants to be swept away, but also wants a certain amount of believability. Although the film contained a good amount of darkness, it did not shy away from being cartoonish either (which I think was partly inspired by the Disney animation), i.e. characters blushing or bouncing on the clouds.

The design of Neverland was breathtaking. I think the CGI, although criticised by some, made the island and creatures look more dreamy and fairytale-like. It was a good combination of CGI for the landscapes and real backdrops for the jungle, so there was enough magic and believability to transport the viewer into the story. A bright colour palette was used for the landscapes, while down-to-earth colours such as browns and greens were used on the ground, such as in “The Lost Boys Hide” under the tree, to give a sense of realism. The costume department also reflected this, from the majestic reds and blacks of the pirates, to the earthly colours of blue and red for the Native Americans, to the natural greens and browns of the Lost boys. I noticed that the colours in Neverland were used as a contrast to the Edwardian London back home, which is realistic but dull compared to the island.

One aspect I liked was that the lighting on Neverland always changed depending on the mood of the scene- unlike the naturalistic lighting on Earth. It was almost as if the island was a living being. For example, when there was a fight on the ship, the lighting was red. When Peter took Wendy to the mermaids, who were scary and frightening, the lighting was dark and blue. This created a surrealistic atmosphere, almost like a fever dream or a kind of nightmare.

Sometimes the environment changed depending on Peter Pan’s mood in the respective scene. I particularly liked how Peter Pan influenced the weather on Neverland. Just his mere presence when he flew to the island changed the entire atmosphere in an instant. His feelings also determined whether it was summer or winter. In other words, its suggested in the film that the longer he has been there, the more the island has become a part of him, so that he can no longer leave it. It’s almost as if the island has transformed him into a magical being.

The exuberant musical score by James Newton Howard: I’ll never forget that. I think that was one of the first movies I saw where I actively noticed the music because it was so brilliant. Even today, the “Flying” soundtrack still gives me goosebumps. It perfectly encapsulates the whimsy, joy and imagination of Peter and Wendy. I loved that there were always different variations. One of my favourite pieces from the movie is ‘Fairy Dance’, which starts off cheerfully and moves up and down depending on the characters’ conflict/what they’re saying in the scene.

Cast

The cast of this film adaptation was magnificent. The look of all the actors not only matched the book description, but also the mood, especially with the Darling family. One of the standouts was Olivia Williams as Mrs Darling. She captured the gentleness of the character perfectly. I also loved the new addition of Aunt Millicent, played by Lynn Redgrave. She fitted into the story so well that I was surprised not to find her in the novel. She had the perfect amount of ridiculousness and hilarity that suited J.M.Barrie’s style.

One particular member of the cast we can probably all agree on that was perfect, was Jason Isaacs, who played both Wendy’s father Mr Darling and Captain Hook. He was certainly a star in this film for sure. I just can not think of anyone who could play him better, especially in a live-action film adaptation. He was particularly good in the role of Captain Hook. When I first saw the film as a child, I did not know that Captain Hook and Mr Darling were played by the same person until my dad pointed it out to me because he was so good. I loved how they portrayed Wendy’s dad as shy and reserved, as opposed to Captain Hook who was flamboyant and sinister. Mirror versions of each other in different realities — that’s a common theme throughout the film. As Captain Hook, Jason Isaacs perfectly captured the essence of viciousness, deviousness and brutality that was necessary for the character. But also the deep loneliness and frustration behind it all. I have seen a quote that was supposedly cut from the film (and never should have been) that provides so much context for his hatred of Peter Pan:

“Imagine a lion in a cage and into that cage flies a butterfly. If the lion was free, it would pay no heed to such creature. But the lion is not free…and so the butterfly drives him slowly insane.” — Captain Hook

They did a really good job of showing how Peter Pan and Captain Hook are mirror images of each other. Peter Pan is a child who secretly wants to be an adult, while Captain Hook is an adult who secretly wants to be a child. Both fight each other for different reasons, but the goal is the same. For example, there is a great scene towards the end where Captain Hook uses his wits to defeat Peter in a fight. Here it becomes clear that there is deep symbolism for the inevitability of adulthood and the loss of childhood. Jason Isaacs really showed off his acting talent here. I liked that he wasn’t portrayed as a “dumb villain”, which he easily could have been.

There were also some great performances among the adults. Most notable was Richard Briers as the ‘pirate’’ Smee. But the child actors, especially the lost boys, really held the movie together. Their solid performances made it so believable that the island was ruled by children. I loved Theodore Chester as Slightly. He was very charming and funny in that role.

Another member of the cast I thought was brilliant was Carsen Grey, an indigenous actress of Haida descent, who played Princess Tiger Lily. I liked that they let her speak her ancestral language, Mohican, in this film. Although this film came out in the early 2000s, it is the only version of Peter and Wendy in which Native Americans are neither erased nor white-washed even though the representation is far from great. Considering how they’re treated in the novel, it’s perhaps for the best overall that they limited some of their scenes. However, I liked how firey she was in this adaptation and not the damsel in distress she was portrayed as in the Disney animation. I think it was a wise decision to cut the infatuation she had with Peter Pan, as it was really just one line in the book that would have added unnecessary drama, and all in all, it would have fallen short if all the female characters were jealous of each other.

They also downplayed Tinkerbell’s jealousy in this regard, portraying it more as her trying to protect Peter Pan’s youth from romantic advances, as hinted at in the novel, and also being sad that Wendy is attracting all of Peter Pan’s attention. Ludivine Sagnier has, in my opinion, succeeded well in making Tinkerbell equally repulsive and endearing, as befits the character.

Wendy Darling

Rachel Hurd-Wood was the perfect cast for the role of Wendy Darling.I was actually surprised to learn that this was her first film role ever, because she was a natural. She effortlessly possessed the same caring nature and charm that makes Wendy so endearing. She is exactly how I imagine the character when I read the story. When people talk about Peter and Wendy, they always mention Tinkerbell, Pan or Hook, but personally I am always drawn to Wendy. She is the real heroine of the story. After all, she was the main reason for Peter to bring her and her brothers to Neverland.

What always amazes me about Wendy’s role in the story is the fact that Wendy literally doesn’t spend much time being a “child” in the time she spends in Neverland. When she’s not escaping death at the hands of mermaids or pirates, she acts as a mother to the ‘lost boys’ and her brothers. She asks herself what she really wants from life. In comparison, she was allowed to behave more like a child at home in Edwardian London. Neverland is not a place where you never grow up. It’s the place where she chooses to grow up. Many people have described Neverland as a manifestation of Wendy’s subconscious as a result of trauma, and I’ve never found that to be more true in this adaptation.

One of the reasons why I think P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan is the best adaptation of the novel is the fact that the film revolves around Wendy’s coming of age. I loved that they expanded on her love of storytelling and also gave her a tomboyish streak. Instead of just being on the sidelines, she’s able to get involved and fight pirates while retaining many of her feminine traits such as her maternal instincts and romantic feelings for Peter. She makes mistakes and sometimes gets dragged into things she knows she shouldn’t do. But in the end, she triumphs.

In many film adaptations of Peter and Wendy that I have seen, Wendy is either only present in passing or not at all. Characters like Peter Pan, Captain Hook and Tinkerbell always take centre stage, which I think is a strange decision as they are part of Wendy’s story and not the other way around. Peter Pan is meant to metaphorically represent the childhood she does not want to give up (which is why the character is always played by a woman in the original play, as he is a mirror image of Wendy). And Captain Hook (J.M.Barrie also wanted him to be played by the same actor as Mr Darling) represents the dark side of her father, or rather what she imagines adulthood to be. This is particularly emphasised in this film adaptation because he is an important factor in her being told to grow up. The father, the concept of adulthood, and Peter Pan, her childhood, are at constant war with each other.

“You’re not supposed to be like Peter, who kept every good and bad aspect of being a child and can’t tell right from wrong. You’re not supposed to be Hook, either. He let go of everything childish and loving about him and became bitter and evil..You’re supposed to fall in the middle, to hold onto the things about childhood that make it beautiful — the wonder, the imagination, the innocence — while still growing up and learning morality and responsibility. You’re not supposed to be Hook. You’re not supposed to be Peter Pan. You’re supposed to be Wendy Darling.” — @maybe-this-time

The 2023 film Peter Pan and Wendy took a different approach, by making Wendy a kind of powerhouse who always saved the day and outshone Peter Pan overall. In my opinion, the 2003 film adaptation emphasised very well that Wendy really is the yin and yang. She's allowed to be romantic, be rescued by others and at the same time determine her own destiny and stand up for herself. Because that’s what her journey in the adaptation is all about. She is pressured by all the adults in her life to grow up. She allows herself to be seduced with the prospect of an eternal childhood by Peter Pan. Then she realises that it is not self-fulfilling. She is tempted by Captain Hook with the concept of adulthood. And finally, she finds a balance between these two extremes on her own terms. By the end of the film, Wendy has made her peace with growing up while still remaining a child at heart. That requires a certain mental strength that we should all strive for.

Peter Pan and Wendy Darling

In most adaptations of Peter and Wendy, such as Hook and Syfy’s Neverland, the focus is on the title character Peter. In the more recent film adaptation Peter Pan and Wendy, the focus is on Wendy. This film adaptation of Peter and Wendy, on the other hand, sticks more closely to the original source material, as the story focuses on Peter and Wendy’s relationship. This is perhaps the reason why I always hesitate when I watch other adaptations, because these two characters are supposed to go together. It’s definitely a relationship that can be portrayed in all sorts of ways because they are symbolically the same person.

Although there is no romance between Peter and Wendy in either the original novel or the play, Wendy quickly develops romantic feelings for Peter which, as a prepubescent child, he does not consciously reciprocate as he has no concept of love other than that of a mother’s. Although Peter cares deeply for her, he ultimately only longs for her to be the maternal figure that is missing in his life. One could go into the symbolism that Peter and Wendy are one and the same, and that this is an expression of Wendy learning to love herself. But in a literal sense, J.M.Barrie had unintentionally created this very strong potential between the two characters. And I personally feel if your'e going to make an adaptation of Peter and Wendy that potential needs to be explored in some way, even if it’s not necessarily romantic.

Hogan recognised this potential and developed the romantic elements, e.g. ‘the “thimble” from the novel, into a very real and tangible plot. In other adaptations, Peter and Wendy’s relationship is rather one-sided. But in P.J. Hogan’s film adaptation, however, it is not at all. Over the course of the film, Peter and Wendy fall deeply in love with each other.

Rachel Hurd-Wood and Jeremy Sumpter had a remarkable on-screen chemistry for young actors, which helped give the adaptation its own identity. Whenever they interacted on screen as Peter and Wendy, it was — like the glittering pixie dust of Tinkerbell — simply magical. The off-screen chemistry between the two definitely helped make the romance so believable as well. When I was younger, I didn’t like romantic subplots in family films. I personally found that they clogged up the main plot because the “romance” tended to be very one-dimensional- but Peter and Wendy in the 2003 film version were simply enchanting.

In the original novel, J.M.Barrie alludes to the possibility of a romance between the two. In the film adaptation, they go all out. Their love story was written so beautifully and profoundly, while staying true to the original text and J.M.Barrie’s themes. This made the conflict hinted at in the novel of “staying in Neverland with Peter or growing up on Earth with Wendy” even more poignant and relevant, because in reality there was only ever one option. They couldn’t find a way to have both. That made the ending even more “heartbreaking” for me as a child, because even though they had the chance to be happy together, she couldn’t give up on growing up to stay. And he couldn’t give up being a child to leave, even though it was a natural progression for him.

Peter Pan

Jeremy Sumpter delivered a fantastic performance as Peter Pan. Not only did he perfectly match the illustrations, but he also managed to perfectly capture the essence of the charismatic, mischievous little boy from the novel. What’s more, of all the versions I have seen so far, he is by far the most accurate, right down to the clothes made of skeleton leaves, the dirty fingernails, the feral mannerisms, the traumatised soul behind the charm and the downright creepy insinuations. By today’s standards, you could almost take Peter Pan for a grown man who consciously decides not to behave like this.

However, when I watch the film again as an adult, I can now understand why he has reservations about growing up in Edwardian England and would rather remain a “child” in Neverland forever. As Peter says in the film, “Would they send me to school? And then to an office?” I feel like most of us today have so many choices as we get older, but back then it was much more limited. The choices were very restricted in that “heterosexist” environment. You could only be a certain thing, and it was much harder to hold on to the pleasures of life. I can now also understand the initial reactions of Michael and John to Peter: He must have seemed scandalous to people at the time. His bright colours, his inappropriate clothing and his behaviour are repulsive to the boys, but Wendy is immediately fascinated and attracted. I think it was a deliberate choice that he is the only character with an American accent to set him apart from the rest of the cast; to emphasise the wildness of the character and his non-conformity to the people of Edwardian London.

Another small aspect I liked was the suggestion that the Lost Boys, although they lived with Peter and obeyed his commands, lived in constant fear of him and did not worship him as in other adaptations. (A fear that is justified as Peter tries to kill them more than once in the film). What the 2003 film adaptation captured perfectly about Peter's character was: how terrible of a person he really is. Peter Pan is a hero when he goes on adventures and fights pirates. You could argue — via the quote “Leave Hook to me” (which Peter says to her in the film) — that Peter is Wendy’s split self who can fight her father (Captain Hook) for her, just like antibodies do with germs when we can’t handle them ourselves.

However, when it comes to understanding emotions, caring about others, even his henchmen, the Lost Boys, and doing anything that inconveniences him, Peter Pan is possibly as bad as Captain Hook. This makes Wendy’s decision to leave him all the more powerful. Although she was initially seduced by his adventurous life, she soon realises that his “life” of joy and adventure is not fulfilling at all. Because in reality, there is no real joy. There is no real adventure. In reality, his life is empty because it is not earned. In addition, she realises that she is gradually losing her memory of the outside world, including her parents - a sign that she is “slowly awakening from the dream”. This leads Wendy to realise that she wants more than what he can give her in Neverland (e.g. romantic love) and decides to leave. Being alive means feeling, accepting and growing. However, as long as Peter remains a boy, he can never truly be alive. Peter Pan conveyed this important message, whereas earlier film adaptations, including the Disney animation, did not.

One of the reasons why good adaptations of Peter and Wendy are so hard to come by, especially in this day and age, is not only because they adapt a performative story that exists in layers of subtext. They also work with a protagonist who doesn’t change. Who doesn’t develop in any way, neither negatively nor positively. Not even just physically, but also mentally. (Even Eli from Let the Right One In, the child vampire, changes in the course of the story). At the end of day, Peter Pan is ultimately there to serve someone else’s story. It works in a fairy tale format. But it doesn’t usually translate very well to the screen because it often leads to one-dimensional storytelling. Even if it seems so natural, it doesn’t come naturally.

However, this adaptation allows Peter Pan to grow. The writers expanded on the small aspect from the book, which is the moment when Wendy enters Peter’s life; he begins to feel emotions. Not just love. But anger. Fear. Sadness. Pain. Disgust. And above all: self-awareness. Almost like a version of puberty in condensed time, as if the change suddenly caught up with his body. When Wendy brings this up, Peter immediately rejects it out of fear. I think most of us can all relate to this when we were in the midst of growing into a young adult. We experience feelings that are scary and new, that we can’t yet fully understand or even want to. For Peter Pan, falling in love is exactly what he is afraid of: growing up and no longer being a child. This adds to an interesting conflict that arises between the two when she asks him to leave with her.

“The thing about Peter Pan is, he’s a coward. Had the chance of a lifetime and he bottled it. Just fucked off back to Neverland. All alone, forever he was, by his own hand. Poor old Wendy, she had to grow old without him.” — Skins, 6x07 “Alo”

In the original novel, the reason Wendy can’t take Peter Pan with her (apart from the fact that he refuses to grow up) is the same reason Lyra in His Dark Materials can’t take Pan — the animal manifestation of her soul — on the boat to the land of the dead. She has to split in order to grow up and leave a part of herself behind. She can’t keep both in order to move on. But that does not mean I always agree with the ending either. In which Peter remains a child and takes Wendy’s future descendants to Neverland and back to look after him. It leaves an icky aftertaste, but at least it fits in with the story J.M. Barrie wanted to tell.

Even though the adaptation conveys the same message, that Peter Pan is the manifestation of Wendy’s youth, even to the end. In this version of Peter Pan, that is no longer the case. By the end of the film, the way he holds himself is different. The way he looks wistfully through the open window and solemnly says, “To live would be an awfully big adventure,” : a sign of self-awareness, while Wendy happily reunites with her family. So much so that Tinkerbell has to pull him by the hair to stop him from joining them and reconsidering his decision. Peter is now old enough to know that he loves Wendy. Maybe he’s also mature enough to know what he’s missing, but he knows he can’t have her the way he wants, so he does the most selfless thing he’s ever done in the whole film by letting her go.

There is no such conflict at the end of the 1953 Disney animated film. Peter Pan is described by Wendy as “wonderful”. In reality, everyone else gets their happy ending, except him, because he deliberately chooses not to. Peter Pan very much turns himself into a tragic figure because he is afraid of the most natural thing in the world. He is afraid of life. And I feel like this version of the story knew that and expressed it strongly, which makes me conflicted now as an adult. I’ve seen endings like this before, where two people fall in love but do not end up together because they grow apart or they are both interested in different things, and it’s very important to reach those points in different ways. It very much reflects real life and is also reminiscent of first love. How that love never really fades. It reminds you of simple times, even when you’ve grown up and moved on. That a part of you is still at that age when you look back on it. These endings happen because people grow — which Peter Pan does not.

“Peter in the books lives in oblivious tragedy. He may suspect that he’s not fully happy, but he tends to forget about it… yet this Peter doesn’t… Wendy leaving him and growing up to be a wife of another man is his unhappy thought…It’s the loss of innocence since Peter could not forget this…It’s the process of growing up…all but confirms that Peter’s character arc in the film is one of accepting the fact he too must grow up to be happy.” — @rex-shadao

And I think that’s the real reason why his character is both the strongest and the weakest part of the adaptation. The writers didn’t make it clear enough that Peter Pan forgets in their version of the character. In the novel, Peter Pan forgets everything automatically, which is why he can exist in this limbo of childhood and not go mad. However, as mentioned earlier, this version of Peter Pan is old enough to remember and, more importantly, to feel. Even though he is the closest to J.M. Barrie’s original vision, unlike his counterpart in the book, he is capable of evolving. That’s why the ending sometimes feels strange to me as an adult.

It was hard to say why I had a strange feeling at first, but I realised that a lot of my mixed feelings stemmed from having seen the film adaptation fresh after reading the novel. Since Peter Pan fully reciprocates Wendy’s love in this version, he ends up being a different character than in the book, which is why I now disagree with them keeping the original ending instead of having him grow up with Wendy. It would symbolise that childhood can co-exist with adulthood, that you don’t have to leave a part of yourself behind. That you can be your true and complete self if you find the balance between the two extremes.

The original ending still works however, in all its bittersweetness. I know what it means and understand what it stands for. Wendy basically says goodbye to her childhood and promises never to forget it. There’s a reason it made such an impression on me when I was younger. It could just be because I’m trying to pick up all the pieces of my broken heart from the floor. But personally, as an adult, I just find it weaker compared to the novel. Sometimes I like to imagine an ending to this version of the story where Peter Pan comes back, having quickly realised that he has outgrown Neverland, but doesn’t meet Wendy again until they are both much older, at a time when Wendy is coming to terms with womanhood and the idea of marriage. Or she even meets his real earth counterpart (if we were to delve into the psychology of Neverland being Wendy’s dream). And their relationship is subjected to the natural test of time and growth.

Peter Pan is an almost perfect adaptation. It matches the humour, the tone and the vision of J.M.Barrie. But I can certainly understand why the film didn’t do so well at the box office. In the month it was released, there was an unfair amount of competition, namely the film Lord of the Rings — The Return of the King. And as an adult, I can now understand why it’s not the film people think of or remember when it comes to Peter Pan adaptations. And it’s not just because it doesn’t fit the elfish, jolly trickster persona that Disney has created.

The film adaptation suffers more from what it doesn’t do — such as maintaining a stable tone and consistent editing — than from what it does. It’s one of those films that would have benefited from being much longer. That way, the inconsistent tone and some of the rushed parts of the adaptation would be much more balanced. It feels like it was missing an extra twenty minutes. For example, the film is narrated by an older version of Wendy, but without the deleted ending where it becomes properly clear that it’s her telling the story to tie everything together, the ending feels a little abrupt. Say what you will about Tim Burton’s adaptation of the Series of Unfortunate Events, but the audience could see where the film’s narration was coming from the whole time. I think if they knew the alternate ending wasn’t going to work (that scene is a classic example of something working well in the novel but not in the film), they should have removed the narrator altogether with the deleted ending and adjusted the film accordingly. They should have extended some scenes so that parts of the film weren’t rushed, such as the introduction, and the story would have been left more up to interpretation as there was no voiceover throughout.

Despite its weaknesses, P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan is still an underrated masterpiece 20 years later. It is an irresistible film that captivates and warms the heart. The film adaptation has certainly stood the test of time, staying true to the original while adding its own flavour to the story. It is full of magic, wonder and heart. It was clearly made by people who loved the origins of the story and explored where they came from, while also digging deep into the text to reshape the character arcs in a fresh and meaningful way. They succeed in capturing J.M.Barrie’s original message, which is that growing up is a natural progression of life, but that doesn’t mean leaving childhood behind entirely. That it is important to maintain a healthy balance between the two: Taking responsibility while appreciating the joys of life. From the vibrant colour palette to the goosebump-inducing music to the solid performances and gorgeous chemistry between Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood, my love for this adaptation will never end, no matter how old I am.

194 notes · View notes

lostlegendaerie · 8 days

Text

Veritas Ratio and Autistic Representation

Chances are you know autistic people in your life; autism itself is a fairly recently coined term, dating back to 1911, and can encompass a wide variety of symptoms and eccentricities which have existed since the dawn of humankind. (The 'fey-touched' child or changeling in European lore shares a lot of traits with autistic children.) Autism is a spectrum, encompassing and overlapping a lot with ADHD and other neurological disorders. There are probably millions of people out there, especially from older generations, who are on the spectrum and have no idea. I did not even get my diagnosis until I was 27.

So it is entirely possible that the creators of Veritas Ratio from Honkai: Star Rail did not intend to write him as autistic and based him on people they knew in their own lives, who, diagnosed or not, are on the autistic spectrum. However, the point of this piece is to talk about the ways in which Veritas Ratio is good autistic representation (in my opinion as a autistic person), and how people who want to write characters like this can take a page out of Honkai's book in their own work.

1) SPECIAL INTEREST. Ratio shows a *staggering* amount of dedication to the pursuit of knowledge and his quest to cure the world of ignorance. This quest of his tends to supersede everything else in his life, with no mention of any friends, family connections or romantic partners in his character story. (Said as a Ratiorine shipper - not sinking any 'ships, here) His dedication to education started early, with reading college undergraduate education levels while still in middle school - seven or so years ahead of his peers. Autism is considered a disability, yes, but it does not exclude you from being smart, and the fixation on your chosen topic(s) can be extremely useful in motivating you to reach the top of your field. His path being The Hunt also outlines this dedication; he is seeking his target without rest or distraction.

2) SENSORY ISSUES. Ratio very explicitly can become distracted and disgusted by the feeling of dirt or sweat on his skin, something that tends to be more prevalent with specific clothing textures but absolutely can manifest in a need to feel clean. He also can apparently become very irritated and overwhelmed by lights and sounds, and wears his plaster mask as a way to deaden and deafen the amount of sensory input that he receives. This allows him to think better, and is a fantastic example of what it feels like to suffer from sensory overload. (If you find yourself getting stressed in crowds, try bringing earplugs and putting them in the next time you're in a noisy restaurant and see if doesn't help you out.)

3) STRONG SENSE OF MORALITY. Autistic people tend to suffer from a somewhat black-and-white feeling of right and wrong, and can hold themselves and other people to an extremely strict moral code. This does not mean that they are always correct in what they believe is right and wrong, but it means that they can be extremely passionate about following those rules. Ratio's beef with the Genius Society and their selectivity is indicative of his unwavering passion towards sharing knowledge with the masses, but the tactless way in which he wishes to cure ignorance bleeds into our fourth point.

4) DIFFICULTY WITH SOCIAL CUES. In one of his earlier conversations with Aventurine (where he is clearly irritated at how careless Aventurine seems to be about their entire mission), Ratio inadvertently insults Aventurine's his lack of education and parents. He apologizes afterwards, stating he did not intend to come across that way, but he maintains the same imperious tone of voice. Autistic people often, but not always, struggle with social cues and can often be considered rude when we are trying to be direct and easily understood; and we can especially struggle with understanding sarcasm or sounding sarcastic when we intend to be sincere.

With my reasons for believing Ratio to be Autistic coded firmly established, let's move onto why I think he is good representation. The two most important parts of representation, in my lived experience as an Autistic person, are RELATABILITY and EMPATHY.

Ratio exhibits some of the same mentalities and symptoms I've had, such as being misunderstood and accidentally offending people and becoming extremely stressed in large crowds due to overstimulation, so he checks off the first box. But the way that the other characters in the game respect him and do not ridicule him for his eccentricities marks the second. Whether in marketing material or in character dialogue options, Ratio's love of baths, his plaster bust, and his ceaseless drive to educate other people (whether they need it or not) are seen as charming and generally positive, and those attributes are not constantly brought up (and mocked) in his interactions and dialogue with other characters. Aventurine doesn't constantly ask Ratio if he needs to leave the Dream to take a bath, and the TB's text conversations with him allow you to engage with his special interests such as his requests for problems to solve and debates to wage against you. He is canonically seen and respected as a brilliant individual, and not reduced to a joke or viewed as comic relief (e.g. Sampo, who almost exclusively is given negative dialogue options for the player to use when interacting with him and who almost every character in the story openly despises.)

Some of you are going to disagree with me in the comments (which is fine, it's my opinion), but for the few of you who read this all the way through, thank you. I hope that this helps you view Ratio and Autistic people overall in a new light, and I am excited to see where else we go from here with him and the rest of the cast!

#saro's writing #hsr meta #hsr ratio #dr ratio #Veritas ratio #autistic experiences

71 notes · View notes

imagining-in-the-margins · 1 year

Text

Piece of Paper (S.R.)

Summary: Spencer and Reader discuss Autism evaluations.

Request: reader tells spencer "i think im autistic" and he’s like "wait you've never been evaluated/diagnosed??" and he helps her advocate for an evaluation or some other kind of support? A/N: I’m sorry if this isn’t exactly what you wanted, Anon, but this is the experience I would like to share as a person who was diagnosed as a toddler 🫶 Couple: Spencer Reid/GN!Reader Category: Comfort/Fluff Content Warning: Autism assessment/Anti-Autistic mentions, implied abuse/gaslighting, minor self-hatred, internalized ableism Word Count: 1k

MASTERLIST

The bullpen was as quiet as it ever was. The bustling crowds had passed through and returned to the comfort of their home. All that remained were those with deadlines, no date life, or neurodivergent tendencies.

You peeked across the desk to notice how Spencer’s hyper-focus had finally faded, leaving him now spinning in his chair while he stared at the ceiling.

“Hey, Spencer?” you called, “Can I ask you a kind of personal question?”

His chair came to a halt.

“Sure, but I’m not sure if I’ll have a satisfying answer,” he chuckled.

You floundered for a moment, struggling to come up with an appropriate way to ask your question. Yet, when you did finally speak, you were anything but eloquent.

“What was it like when you were diagnosed with Autism?”

“Oh!” he said excitedly, “I’ve actually never been assessed.”

Immediately, your face began to burn, and your stomach churned with the realization you’d just made a number of possibly rude assumptions.

“Oh, my gosh, I’m so sorry—“

“I’m not offended,” he reassured you with a smile, “I agree with your assessment.”

You smiled at the wordplay, but the intensity of his gaze drove your eyes back to the mess of paperwork on your desk.

“Can I ask why?” you asked.

Spencer didn’t seem to mind at all that you stared at the desk instead of him. He offered his explanation with his normal enthusiasm.

“My mom wasn’t exactly the biggest fan of psychiatrists.”

Understandable. Neither were you.

“Plus,” he trailed off. You turned to find him staring at the ceiling again. He rocked the chair back and forth as he said somewhat solemnly, “the world isn’t particularly fond of Autistic people.”

The words felt like a blow to your chest. Like your heart had turned to stone or something unbearably cold.

“Ah,” you sigh. You brought a hand to your face to try to hide the disappointment.

Spencer, still looking above you both, didn’t even notice the shift in tone.

“Why do you ask?”

“Nothing,” you replied, “It’s nothing, it’s stupid.”

Even he couldn’t miss the sadness in your voice, though. After a moment of uncomfortable silence, you heard the realization hit him with a gasp.

“Were you planning on scheduling an assessment?”

“I was considering it, but… I don’t know if I should.”

There were a lot of reasons why that was the case — self doubt, fear of the unknown, chronic gaslighting — but you didn’t want to go into all of that. Instead, you chose to sympathize with the plight he’d already shared with you.

“Because you’re right, other people are… not very receptive to the diagnosis.”

Some more than the rest.

Spencer paused for a second, even though you knew he wanted to say something. For a moment, he wrestled with the right words and the right tone to prevent his anger from projecting onto the wrong person.

“Would you be doing it for them?” he asked, “The other people?”

It seemed like a silly question… one you’d never really stopped to ask yourself.

“What do you mean?”

That time, when Spencer started speaking, you couldn’t find it in you to stop him. You stayed silent because you knew he was offering you his unfiltered thoughts on something personal to him.

“I mean… why do you want someone else to tell you? I don’t want to talk you out of something that would bring you peace of mind, but I would encourage you to ask yourself if that’s really the reason you’re doing it, because that piece of paper can make a lot of things much harder for you. Immigration, medical decision making, adoption, child rearing, hell, even your job… that target on your back will impact aspects of your life that you’ve probably never even considered it would.”

You sat there, soaking in the hopelessness of the moment. You begged your heart to slow down, but it continued racing along with your thoughts.

Ultimately, there was nothing left to be said but, “Yeah, you’re right.”

“Did I upset you?”

There was a subtle regret in his voice, but you knew it had needed to be said. That bluntness, that unfiltered honesty had been exactly why you’d asked him.

So, you managed a smile as you thanked him the best way you knew how; by telling him the truth.

“No, I appreciate your honesty.”

He responded with his own.

“Okay. I’m still sorry, though.”

“Thanks,” you said, although you’d meant ‘Me too.’

Spencer didn’t respond. Instead, he turned and scrambled to find a blank sheet among his notebooks. At first, you thought nothing of it. But once you heard him scribble something onto a piece of paper that was immediately ripped from its place, you turned to him.

His eyes remained fixed on the note he’d just written while he spoke.

“At the end of the day, no matter how badly we want to believe things will change… the people who don’t believe you now… they won’t believe a piece of paper, either,” he said.

Then, standing from his chair, Spencer closed the space between you, note in hand. He clutched it tightly between his fingers that were held against his chest.

“But if it helps, I believe you.”

Tears sprung from your eyes so quickly that you weren’t sure what to do with them. You decided to let them sit there, to soak in the saltwater reminder that you were not nearly as inhuman as the others made you seem. And when Spencer held out his hand to offer you the lifeline on lined paper, you took it.

He smiled.

“A doctor’s note, in case you ever need it.”

Spencer returned to his desk without another word. You set the piece of paper down and decided that, when you were ready, you would see what he’d had to say.

Then, when you were ready, you would find the handwritten message:

“You are the only expert of your life. You already know the answer.”

(Tell me what you thought about this piece here!)

Please also consider reblogging and/or commenting on fics you enjoy to help keep the fandom alive!

Looking for more fics with an Autistic!Reader? Check out my Rec List here!

P.S. Did you know Tumblr might be hiding some of my posts from you? Learn how to change this setting here so you can enjoy my more scandalous works (if you want), including my most recent one, which can be found here.

1K notes · View notes

aroaceleovaldez · 3 months

Note

i hope this doesn't sound like a silly or weird thing to send you, but i'm autistic and have long thought of nico and a handful of other riordanverse characters as autistic and i love your posts about why nico in particular seems intentionally autistic-coded. but i've been thinking, if rick did intend for any of his characters to be autistic, why wouldn't he say so outside of the text at least? i can't think of a good reason why not, when he goes out of his way to be explicit about so many other characters' various marginalized identities and has confirmed things like reyna being asexual outside of the original text. so it gives me this nagging sort of doubt that maybe rick just made nico come off as so extremely autistic coded by accident, somehow. if it wasn't an accident i do kind of wish he'd say so because there's next to zero explicitly stated autistic representation in, like, any media so it'd be nice to have here even if not strictly necessary. either way though, like i said, i love your posts and i agree with you 100% about autistic nico! some others i like to think are autistic are annabeth and leo.

(Most of this is gonna be kind of a tangential ramble to your point and i apologize in advance just bear with me)

This actually touches upon something I've been meaning to do a write-up on recently, which is: depending on the coding, that is our explicit statement. In most coding, actually, that's kind of the point. (Also something something Death of the Author.)

You may have noticed a recent trend across media of characters saying things directly rather than expressing them in a natural way, and often this includes incredibly stilted dialogue of characters explaining things in very politically correct, wikipedia-esque descriptions and terminology that make absolutely no sense for the characters' personalities or mannerisms. This is born out of the idea that if something is not stated in explicit terms, no amount of evidence below an outright direct exact statement will ever count - if two characters of the same gender have an explicit kiss and wedding on-screen, it doesn't matter because they never said the word "gay," etc etc.

In PJO, prior to more recent books, we get plenty of examples of characters explaining parts of their identities without direct statements. Percy never needs to say in outright terms that he has PTSD from Gabe - and it doesn't make sense that he would! He's 12! He's never been diagnosed for that. He probably doesn't even know what PTSD is really. But we, the audience, know without a doubt he has PTSD, because it is clearly expressed to us. That is coding. Tyson is coded as having down syndrome. Nico is coded as being autistic. It doesn't make sense for Nico to turn to the camera and explain that he's autistic and what that means, because he definitely never got diagnosed for it and probably doesn't know what that means cause the diagnosis literally did not exist when he was growing up - and heck, autism terminology was still kind of getting sorted out back in 2007 when TTC was published, so it's unlikely we could have feasibly gotten any exact terminology wink-wink-nudge-nudges short of something like how Percy outright mentions other students called Tyson the r-slur in Sea of Monsters. And in fact we see that same exact style of coding with Nico later on in the series. Nico never turns to the camera and says word-for-word "I am gay, I am mlm, here's me wearing my exact pride flags" (until TOA/TSATS, which... did the exact thing i mentioned about characters speaking like theyre trying to get a good grade in therapy, or giving a powerpoint presentation). But it is never unclear that HoO is telling us outright that Nico is gay. It's not just hinted at. It's there, in your face. But entirely because no one ever outright says "gay" specifically it's technically still only coding. We know he's gay, we know the characters have trauma/ptsd, etc etc. We don't need it spelled out - that's just kind of condescending. It's like if you said describing a character with "eyes like moss" means they were "green-eye coded."

Nico being autistic-coded isn't hidden. It's not a secret. It's very overt. If you know what autism looks like, well, yeah, there he is. Even if you only know very vague 2007 media presentation of autism, Nico in TTC is easily recognizable enough as autistic because that's the point. Tyson is easily recognizable as being coded as having down syndrome and it's very clearly very intentional! It's just never spoon-fed in exact terms to the reader because it's not necessary! You've already been told the information necessary to tell you what is up with this character, so just plainly going "oh they're [x] in exact terms" is very much telling-not-showing and feels redundant. And while there are places for that kind of thing, most of the time it's very unnecessary. Sometimes coding is subtle, sometimes it's obvious, and yeah there are times where writers code characters unintentionally, but the textual evidence is there, and that's the whole point.

And that's what Death of the Author is about - it doesn't matter what the author intended at the end of the day, because if it's in the text it's in the text. You can look at author intent to try and figure out what that text means, but the text is the text. A Separate Peace is a very classic example - author John Knowles denies there being homosexual subtext, and meanwhile one of the protagonists living in 1942 puts on a pink shirt while saying he doesn't mind of people think of him as gay. What the author says after the fact doesn't matter - if it's there, it's there. So Rick saying anything outside of the books is completely irrelevant. And Rick talks about this a lot - he actively tells people that his statements outside of the books are just his own thoughts, but what's in the books is what's in the books, and if the text supports it then that's all the evidence you need.

Nico specifically is a case where yeah, he's clearly autistic-coded. It's very obvious and very obviously intentional when he's younger, and as the books progress it remains a background trait of his but is still notable (except for when it gets forgotten in TOA/TSATS like everything else, including the adhd/dyslexia, but i digress). It's a clear pattern within the first few books that Rick is intentionally including. It doesn't make sense, especially for the year the book was published, for the reader to be directly told in explicit terminology that Nico is autistic, because the reader is already being told that Nico is autistic.

And yeah, Rick doesn't mention Nico being autistic-coded outside of the text, but he also doesn't mention Tyson being coded as having down syndrome. He also said one time that Percy doesn't have PTSD at all, which is very incorrect starting from book 1. Again, Death of the Author. Whatever Rick says outside of the books does not matter, because he already said it in the books. And there's plenty of other stuff in the books that Rick doesn't touch upon, particularly relating to character identity - did you know Leo is Native? Sammy mentions that the Valdez family is Native in Son of Neptune but we don't get any specifics and then it's like never brought up again anywhere. That happens all the time in the series - and outside of the series - Rick can't possibly address every single point to confirm/deny everything from the books. That's what analysis is for! And that's why my blog exists 👍

#pjo #riordanverse #nico di angelo #autistic nico #analysis #ask #Anonymous #long post //#tone indicator just to be sure cause i know i used a lot of italics: this is all non-agressive/not mad i prommy #im just very passionate about this topic (coding & fandom concepts surrounding ''canon'' + death of the author)#also controversial opinion cause i know some people have talked about wanting the use of the r-slur in SoM censored #but i think it should stay because. well. yeah no that was still very commonly used in 2006 #trust me i heard it a lot. i was there. in fact it was commonly used after that point. for awhile.#it wasnt until like a bit into the 2010s iirc that campaigns started to go ''hey maybe. dont use that word.''#like that was RECENT #and yeah! these books are not old! TLT is only just coming up on 20 years. thats not super old for a book!#and yeah! that term was considered a-okay terminology to be used in a middle grade book in 2006! which is startling to think now!#but that's also why it's important to not erase that #because otherwise you forget that up until very recently that word was considered Perfectly Acceptable #and in SoM it's even specifically acknowledged to be used in a hurtful way! Percy is actively condemning it!#like. dont put it in the show or whatever. obviously. replace it with a different indication/coding to explain Tyson's struggles #not that i think Disney would put the r-slur in their show. but like. dont erase it from the book??? from 2006??????#i am frightened to see how the show will handle tyson though. its not gonna go well i can feel it in my bones #anyways man i should post that excerpt from A Separate Peace though #just cause that scene has lived in my brain rent-free for years

73 notes · View notes

irishmammonagenda · 4 months

Text

CATHOLIC MC WHO GETS SENT INTO HELL?! NOT CLICKBAIT!!!!! (part two)

introduction, part one, part two (you are here), part three

Warnings: None? Mentions of religion (obviously) and GN but AFAB MC,Mammon being an idiot, and me not being able to type irish accents out phonetically.

The sound of the council room door beckons the brothers to look toward it, Diavolo’s gaze stays upon the litte human in front of him. How interesting! This was a rare insight into human world culture, he couldn’t look away!

Barbatos stands at the doorway, explaining that Simeon was helping Solomon with a spell and he would be in the student council room the moment it was safe to walk away from the cauldron.

Diavolo nods, looking back to MC, who is currently praying. (surprise surprise) Well Simeon would be here soon!

Simeon arrives by the door with Solomon and Luke in tow, his calmed smile slightly strained as he asks what exactly the problem is.

"What the problem is?! This!" Mammon says, or rather, shouts. "This right 'ere is the problem!" He points towards MC and Simeon's gorgeous blue eyes widen, just a little.

Hearing a gasp from Luke, he immediately turns around, concern for the young angel quickly vanishes when he sees the stars in the young boy's eyes.

Simeon nods, so the young angel felt it too. The aura was pure..someone had been praying.

That someone must be the young human on their knees. Simeon chuckled, it was an adorable sight.

“MC was it?” he asks gently, making sure to shove on his halo before the human looked up, immediately, they ceased, their tense posture relaxing.

“Y-yeah.” MC nods, Simeon can see the relief on their face. What an adorable human, Diavolo seems to agree as he coos softly and tries to cover it up.

Simeon was doing just fine in calming the little thing down, before, like usual, the brothers had to be chaotic.

“So MC, are ya normal now”

Simeon swears to Michael he is going to glare somewhat meanly at Mammon.

Thats all it takes to send MC back into panic, except this time they’re more of a logical approach and…

…bless their bottle of riverrock water.

…Making it holy water.

…And then chucking it at Mammon….

…and missing…

(moreso Mammom dived to the ground Rocky Style so it hit Asmo)

..the champagne haired demon screeches like all nine cricles of hell just went up in flames AGAIN.

Its a bit of an overreaction seeing as Asmodeus is one of the most powerful demons in the Devildom so Holy Water is more like a dull bee sting.

Lucifer sighs. Simeon tenses. Solomon is fucking cackling.

All the while MC stares at their hands, “…I can make Holy Water….Im not a priest…” they look down at their very much female school uniform “or a biological male…”

The confusion, thankfully, is what allows Solomon to swoop in like the housefly he is and take the bottle of Holy Water from the clearly dazed human.

This is an opening that Diavolo exploits. “So MC, we truly mean you no harm…! I’m Lord Diavolo, Prince of the Devildom and Acting Ruler! You’re here as an exchange student for a year as we chose you!” He says cheerfully, careful eyes watching MCs reaction.

“What.The.Fuck.” MC says, more to theirself than anyone else.

“We sent you an email.” Barbatos adds in gracefully.

“Oh. Must be in my spam folder. Also who checks their email.” MC looks around the room calmly. “So who are these emos?”

The black haired man from before steps forward a devilish smirk on his devilishly handsome face, “I’m Lucifer, the eldest brother and the Avatar of Pride.”

“Gay.” MC then turns to the Irish One who’s suprisingly not paler than milk (the Irish don’t exist)

“I’m the Great Mammon! Avatar of Greed…don't be messin’ wi’ me human.”

MC nods shakily, making a clear note to ask later if he has an Autism diagnosis.

Speaking of an Autism diagnosis, the third born introduces himself quietly before hiding into his game again.

The introductions go so on and so forth until MC stares at Lucifer, their head tilted like a dog not understanding something.

"…Pride, Greed, Envy, Wrath, Lust, and Gluttony…Theres supposed to be 7 deadly sins. Where's Sloth?"

shit.

#obey me headcanons #obey me shall we date #obey me x reader #obey me imagines #omswd #obey me mammon #obey me lucifer #obey me leviathan #obey me satan #obey me x catholic reader

61 notes · View notes

bones-and-earth · 2 months

Text

To ignorant fucking doctors/psychiatrist /therapist:

thanks for:

- Assuming/insinuating that I am semiverbal and slowly losing whatever ability to have to speak from pain ON PURPOSE.

-Assuming that I am over reacting by using a mobility aid- because I'm in so much pain. (I can barely fucking stand let alone walk at all. I am shaking so severely that it hurts to even use a Cane )

-Assuming after displaying obvious traits of autism, and being disabled mentally to the point it not only impedes my speech but my ability to socialize and work- that I was not only delusional from my BPD but also a hypochondriac and liar looking for attention. And seemingly thinking I am less likely to be autistic because I'm AFAB and got good grades.

-Assuming when I was literally sobbing from migraines since age 6 that I was a hypochondriac (later diagnosed with chronic tension migraines)

-THANK YOU for not realizing that ptsd and c-ptsd was a actual diagnosis and asked me to define the diagnosis and list its symptoms. (Literally asked me: "What is post traumatic stress disorder?" Apparently he never even heard of it despite being a psychiatrist)

-Assuming I've gone to inpatient so many times because he assumed I "refused to take any medications in the past 3 years." (Which is a actual blatant lie )

-saying I can not use my aac despite me having mentioned my speech loss episodes.

-dismissing all my experiences and thoughts on my own mental health as delusions because at the time I had a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

-telling me it was my fault I was being verbally and mentally abused because I was "ungrateful despite living under her [the abusive family member] roof."

This all actually happened!!

I understand doctors are human and not perfect but at bare minimum actually listen.

So to all the medical professionals: stop dismissing patients, assuming things about them and actually listen.

And to anyone who has experienced this or similar situations I'm sorry.

(Just to clarify for those who can not easily read tone - the thank you is heavily sarcastic in this post. I am quite frustrated.)

#actually disabled #disabled #physically disabled #chronic pain #chronic illness #disability #disabled punk #neuropunk #mentally disabled #physical disability #tw mental hospital #tw: ableism #tw abuse #tw ableism #tw medical trauma #tw medical mention #angry post #inherent mistreatment in the medical field

43 notes · View notes

jaskiersbard · 11 months

Text

Fuck JK Rowling but it makes me so angry to think we could have had a complete Fantastic Beasts series with an autistic lead who isn’t a total stereotype, who is loveable, who has a love interest instead of just being infantilised…and instead we’re getting a seven season Harry Potter reboot/remake that no one asked for or wanted on HBO Max.

When I was going through the process of my autism diagnosis, feeling anxious and worried about what being diagnosed would mean, knowing that Newt Scamander - a character who is adored by so many in a major franchise - was being played as autistic helped me tremendously. I saw much of myself in Newt, and it made me feel seen that an autistic person like myself could be the hero, that Newt wasn’t a joke or stereotype. It was so important to me coming to terms with my diagnosis that a character I loved was like me and not limited by being autistic.

I’ve mentioned this before but on the opening day of Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore in the UK, there was a boy on the row in front of me. When Newt came onscreen, he started bouncing and flapping his hands excitedly - like me, he was autistic and saw himself represented on the big screen.

“But Luna Lovegood” - you know what, controversial but fuck your “but Luna Lovegood”. Her actress sided with the TERF, and Luna is NOT confirmed to be autistic, it’s just a popular fan headcanon. Meanwhile Newt Scamander has been confirmed by Eddie Redmayne (not JKR, fuck her) to be on the spectrum. I’m not saying she definitely isn’t because I can definitely see it, and it’s wonderful autistic people can relate, but I’m talking about a character who is intentionally written and portrayed as autistic instead of just fan headcanons.

What does having a love interest have to do with this? Believe it or not, this isn’t me just being a shipper: too often are autistic people infantilised, as if we can’t love other people or that people are incapable of loving us. But - as anyone following me most likely knows - Newt Scamander has a love interest, Porpentina “Tina” Goldstein, who he’s canonically married to in the future. They even have a grandson who is called Rolf and marries the aforementioned Luna.

In the three films, we only got a few scenes (and then JK Rowling cut Tina out because Katherine Waterston called her out on multiple occasions for being a transphobe) of Newtina but what we got showed that not only is Newt capable of forming a romantic attachment but also Tina clearly loves Newt as he is, quirks and all. She understood his odd compliment of “salamander eyes” because she knows his special interest is magical creatures and it’s his way of saying he adores her eyes. She read his book and genuinely made an effort to learn because she knew magical creatures were important to him, and we saw her grow from thinking he was writing an “extermination guide” to giving him the name for his book, “Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them”. My girl Tina LOVES Newt for who he is and always has, and that’s beautiful.

Seeing an autistic person not only fall in love - he spends the whole of the 2nd and 3rd films lamenting on how beautiful she is, talking about her and with her picture in his pocket/suitcase - but also being loved for who they are is something so rarely seen and is so important.

I’ll be the first to hold my hands up and say that the second and third Fantastic Beasts movies weren’t the greatest, by the way. I will agree to that. The first one seems like a damn masterpiece in comparison, even with its problems, but I’m still angry.

The fact that JK Rowling’s bigotry has contributed to losing this rare example of autistic representation in a major mainstream franchise is something no one talks about when discussing her actions, and it hurts that no one seems to care about canon autistic representation.

#this was prompted by me rewatching the first two films whilst sick last week #I tweeted this out last week but felt it relevant to post here #fantastic beasts and where to find them #newt scamander #eddie redmayne #autism #actually autistic #tina goldstein #porpentina goldstein #katherine waterston #newtina #fantastic beasts: the crimes of grindelwald #fantastic beasts: the secrets of dumbledore #newt x tina #anti jk rowling #anti jkr #radfems dni #terfs dni

168 notes · View notes

parvulous-writings · 6 months

Text

Bill and Ted Neurodivergency Headcanons

Just some little headcanons that have been bouncing back and forth in my mind recently! Very short, I just wanted to get my thoughts down and out there to be honest

Not my gif

Bill and Ted both have AuDHD (Autism and ADHD), but to varying degrees.

My reasoning is thus: they are both impulsive, stim a lot together, and are at times slow to wrap their heads around certain things, unless it truly interests them. (Such as their interest in launching their band, vs their ability to retain anything they learn in history up until being face-to-face with it). I believe they may also have echolalia - they both use "dude" and similar terms frequently - and whilst these were of course popular terms when the original two films released, the pair carry these phrases well into their adult life, and since they still spend so much time around each other I believe it may be because they're just endlessly bouncing off one another.

Not to mention the fact that they stopped being sneaking in the Tudor Castle to be nerds about Star Wars, completely disregarding their task at hand until Ted falls down the stairs. .... And that they play 20 questions whilst falling down a hole.

Also not to mention the fact the amount of lyrics that they are able to recite at the drop of a hat? Their knowledge of Rock is immeasurable - because it's a shared special interest.

I'm not sure if I have any specific evidence of this (None comes to mind immediately) - but I have a sneaking suspicion that of the two; in Ted, his autism is more prominent, and in Bill, it's his ADHD.

I think it's reasonable to assume that neither of the boys have a diagnosis until later in life - by that point though there aren't exactly many resources for them, and they've already got a somewhat functioning support system (mainly one another, and of course, their wives whilst we're thinking about it). Bill probably tried to take meds at one point, but came off of them after about 3-4 months due to the headaches and loss of sleep that he started to suffer with. Ted was never prescribed meds, even in adulthood.

Going back to childhood/teen years, I don't think anyone really had many suspicions that they had AuDHD, simply because their interests and hobbies were relatively mainstream. If anyone did have the thought that something "may not be right", it would probably be Ted's dad, but he wouldn't have gone to the doctor about the fact. He more considers it a disciplinary issue - I.e, the fact that himself or any tutors haven't been as rigid or harsh as they should be to keep Ted in line, and on the right path to success.

In later life, though, I think it might be more obvious. They go more into less mainstream instruments when they bring in the theremin to their music - not only showing their devotion to music and all it's parts and genres, but also their fixation. (I don't know many people who know or listen to the theremin or music it containing it besides myself). Their inability or unwillingness to change their mannerisms, also, I think is a sign. They don't like change.

I may update/add to these at a later date, but these are my ideas on Bill and Ted's neurospicy situation - I personally think they are AuDHD as mentioned, and that may just be me projecting onto them, but at the same time I don't think there's any chance that these two are neurotypical - if you have any thoughts, feel free to share them!!

#fluff #bill and ted's excellent adventure #bill preston #bill s preston esquire #bill s preston #bill and ted #ted theodore logan #ted logan x reader #ted logan #headcanons #sfw headcanons #drabble #late night rambles #late night ramblings #late night post #i wrote this at like 1 am

110 notes · View notes

am-i-the-asshole-official · 3 months

Note

AITA for possibly invalidating a self-diagnosed autistic person

I (20sNB) met D (20sM) in an online server for an anime fandom we're both in. I'm a psychology student who was professionally diagnosed with autism in early childhood. D and I developed a friendship based on having similar fandom opinions. I don't remember how me being autistic came up in conversation but when I mentioned it, he described himself as "autistic as f#ck". Sometimes he would get into arguments with other people in the server and bring up his autism if he was called out on how he spoke to people. On his twitter he said his autism was self-diagnosed and he has no interest in getting a professional diagnosis but he could if he wanted to.

I have complicated feelings on self-diagnosis; I think there's pressure in the autistic community to accept every single self-diagnosed person as valid. I personally would never definitively say I had something that I hadn't been professionally diagnosed with. That being said, I understand that there are factors that would prevent someone from getting a diagnosis so some people *have* to only be self-diagnosed. I don't have a problem with it as long as people aren't spreading misinformation or being actively harmful, which is what I (and others) thought D was doing. My issue wasn't him being self-diagnosis, it was that he was using his self-diagnosed autism to justify incorrect (and harmful) claims.

I noticed a few times that he would make comments like "autism isn't a disability" and "some autistics have high support needs because of intellectual disability", which is just flat out wrong. D also claimed that if he was to get a diagnosis, his would be level 3 autism (which would be for someone with high support needs with severe social and communication deficits, generally nonverbal) but he also is a college student who's been in a relationship for over a year and he works part-time in retail. For context, my diagnosis happened when there was different terminology but my psychologist considers me to be somewhere between level 1 or 2 and I am also studying and working part time.

Another person in the server (let's call them P, also 20sM) brought up a different disorder that they'd been diagnosed with (not autism although P is autistic as well) and D immediately said "I probably have that too but I can't be bothered to do anything about it".

P and a few other people in the server expressed some frustration in a separate group chat about D's tendency to (a) say things about autism that just aren't true and (b) say "omg me too" every time one of us brings up things we have. Once D said autism isn't a disability the third or fourth time we'd had enough and I responded "D, that's not right". D took offense to that and claimed as a fellow autistic person I should agree with him. I said "D, I'm autistic and it's a disability, I call myself disabled because my autism is literally disabling". D said he felt like disabled is a bad word and he doesn't like using it about himself. I said "D, no one's forcing you to use it about yourself if you don't want to, but saying autism isn't a disability is just wrong". P pointed out that every time someone in the server talks about being neurodivergent D is like "omg me too" and P also said that D doesn't get to claim to be autistic while also spreading misinformation, especially when the misinformation being spread is ableist. D got mad at P for calling him ableist; he insisted he's autistic and self-diagnosis is valid. I said "I get that, but when the information you're spreading is flat-out wrong, it kind of makes me question your researching skills".

D called P and I both ableist, told us we were so privileged to be diagnosed (which neither of us disputed but also D *could* have been diagnosed but chooses not to be even though he has the resources to access a professional diagnosis) and we're "f#cking assholes" for invalidating self-diagnosed autistics. D's partner (20sF) also got involved and claimed we were bullying D and we both have "pick-me" attitudes. P and I both muted the server and disengaged for a while.

Later on, D messaged P and I both. D claimed his reaction to what was said was because of his autism. P had had enough and said "buddy, you don't get to say that" and D got mad and blocked P. I told D I was going no-contact and D could block me if he wanted. D called me an asshole and I blocked him.

It's probably worth noting that my autism means that I have difficulty interpreting people's messages in text form and tend to take what people say at face value. Sometimes D getting overly confrontational triggered my anxiety and caused me to feel very uneasy around him since it was in text form and there was no vocal tone to decipher (if that makes sense). The thing is, I don't think D is necessarily not autistic, I just think D has some internalized ableism and doesn't really understand the nuances of the autism spectrum enough to make a sound judgement and he should have maybe not made claims about an identity he knows very little about, but maybe P and I might have been a little harsh because we'd been stewing on our feelings for so long.

What are these acronyms?

#aita #am i the asshole

114 notes · View notes

ingravinoveritas · 1 month

Note

Did you see Neil's tumbler post about autism?? I never knew. Did he ever said anything about it before? My son was recently diagnosed, and Neil saying that he's autistic made me feel... I don't know, connection to him in a new way? Recognized? Hopefull? I don't have the words. Just wanted to hear your thoughts on it. I hope i didn't come off as offensive in some way. English is not my native language.

Hi there! I am slightly behind in Asks, so apologies to folks who have been sending them in over the past few days--trying my best to catch up now.

Firstly, you did not come off as offensive at all, so please don't worry! And yes, I did see Neil's Tumblr post (it's here, for those who might have missed it), and it's given me quite a lot of feelings, for reasons that would probably be expected.

I think what immediately came to mind when I read his post was a conversation I had with Neil when I met him back in November at a tribute to Ray Bradbury. I told him how much I was struck by the story he'd read, as it felt very much like an allegory for autism and resonated so much with my own experiences as an autistic person. He seemed to appreciate my comments and agreed with my observation, but never at any point in our conversation mentioned anything about identifying as autistic himself.

Does that necessarily mean anything? Of course not. I know that Neil does not owe me (or anyone else) a disclosure, and the decision to disclose is a very personal one that each person has to make for themselves. But thinking of Neil's post the other day, I'm also reluctant--for a variety of reasons--to say that it is a disclosure, or Neil definitely stating that he is autistic.

When I got your Ask on Friday morning, I was eager to answer it, though I knew I would have to wait because I was at work. Soon after, I had a difficult, emotionally draining meeting with my two supervisors. I ended up crying at work--which I have now realized is a trauma response--and by the time I got home and was starting to process everything, it was difficult not to look at Neil's post and flinch, particularly at the mention of "superpowers." That day, for the first time in a very long time, I could only feel the "kryptonite" part of being autistic. (My personal stance is that I have never considered autism to be a "super power," but something that is neither all good or all bad, and is part of who I am, yet not all of who I am.)

And from the conversation I had with my supervisors, I felt the responsibility and the pressure of other people seeing me in ways that I never intended--and regardless of whether I want to be seen that way. (For context: This was about my work as a professional speaker and people seeing me as an expert in autism/sexuality, when I never use the word "expert" to describe myself and always tell people I don't have all of the answers.)

The reason I mention this is because I feel like people read that post from Neil and--understandably, of course--saw something. They felt the connection that you described, and that sense of recognition. But what concerns me is that it's going to somehow turn Neil into a representative for an entire community, when that may not be something he wants or feels like he can be. If he is on a journey with autism--whether that means self-diagnosis, or a clinical diagnosis, or not having/seeking a diagnosis at all--that's something incredibly personal. As difficult as that journey is for people navigating it privately, myself included, Neil is possibly doing it in the public eye, which means that everything--every achievement and every misstep--is that much more amplified.

To that end, what I often see with Neil and social media is that he is either lavished with praise or torn to shreds (with very little in between). Being autistic means there is another possible dimension to who Neil is, but it can't be the only lens through which we see him. So I'm just hoping fans don't pin all of their dreams and expectations on him--not only for their sake and avoiding potential disappointment, but also for Neil's. To allow him the messiness and imperfection of being human, instead of a perfect role model.

I hope all of this makes sense. I'm still feeling a little raw from this past Friday, but I wanted to be sure I answered your question. Thank you for writing in! x

#mayaws #reply post #neil gaiman #autism #Friday was also the first time in a very long time that I felt that sense of being trapped inside myself #i used to feel it so strongly and all the time growing up #so it triggers the bejesus out of me to have something put me back in that head space #i'm feeling a lot of feelings #just hoping this wasn't too jumbled #thoughts #personal post #discourse

47 notes · View notes

Last Seen Blogs

juli-ackles

{INTENSA}

juli-ackles

{INTENSA}

pythonanywherecom

Kitchen tiles

juli-ackles

{INTENSA}

ericklocksmitheblu925

The unique locksmith blog 5705