Okay, obviously I have some body image issues. This is very clear to pretty much everyone who knows me. I have had them since I hit about 10 years old I think? That gives me 15 years of disliking the way I look, for one reason or another. I have tried a lot of things throughout that time to change my perception of myself. And currently, I feel like I am stuck in a weird place that I can't figure out how to escape.

I understand that there are studies now showing that dieting and working out don't actually work long term for most people. I know that getting into that mostly causes things like yo-yo dieting and circular weight gain/loss. I know that being fat is being shown to not actually be unhealthy in the ways it has often been shown as and perceived to be. I know that literally all the media everywhere is blasting me with idealized bodies that pretty much do not exist or only exist through extremely unsustainable/unhealthy means.

I have tried for so long to believe in and promote body neutrality or positivity for myself and other people. I constantly refuse to let myself think about what I see in the mirror or in pictures. I tell myself to get exercise for the physical and mental health benefits, not for my physical appearance. I try to view my body for what it can do and not how it looks. I tell myself to live the life I want to live now, rather than waiting to live it till I have the body I imagine living that life. Without exaggeration, I am fairly certain I think about these things every single day.

And none of it is working.

I actually feel I dislike my appearance now more than I did even a year ago. I feel like I am constantly noticing things about my body that I never did before or new changes to my body, and I am deeply uncomfortable with them. And I want to do something about it, and clearly simply changing my mentality isn't doing anything. I want to diet and exercise. But I also know it likely won't be a permanent change. I am concerned that I would give myself an eating disorder. And I'm also concerned that I would be feeding into diet/exercise culture. I am worried about hurting the people around me who are also fat. I am anxious about the fact that I am not actually that large so I don't want to talk about it with other people because I know it will make people who are larger than I am feel terrible. I don't want to make other people who are gaining weight feel bad for that. But, I hate the way I look.

This is not sustainable. At some point something will break and I think it might end up being my brain. I am worried about how that would end up. The things I do for my brain and my body shouldn't be about how it might affect other people, it should be for me. But I don't want to be bad for the things I do. I want and have wanted for so long to look like a powerbuilder/warrior/dwarf/strongman lifter/crossfit athlete/etc. I want to be big. I want to be visibly strong and powerful. And I am absolutely not. And I know I struggle with commitment and discipline and all of that, but I also know I struggle a lot with how this desire appears to other people.

Really, I think what this is all coming down to is other people's opinions. I dislike the way I look and am told that's bad. I want to change the way I look and I'm told that's bad. I do nothing and get told that's bad. I have to want these things for the right reason, in the right way, and have to talk about it right all the time. And I just can't. I don't like the way I look and I wish I looked like a brick shithouse and everyone else can fucking suck it.

I think there's an argument to be made in favor of showing the reality of what Angel deals with on the day to day, both on the gear he wears and the SA he faces from Val.

but these kinds of scenes can very easily be exploitative; used for cheap shock value & end up fetishizing that abuse by presenting it as titillating. it's long happened to female characters where the violence becomes an excuse to show them brutalized or with their clothes ripped off and given how often Angel is sexualized it can just as easily happen to him.

Addict managed to communicate a whole history of sexual abuse committed by Valentino with just a forced kiss and a hard cut to Angel having a breakdown in his room. The scene focused on Angel's emotional distress rather than the act itself, so it avoided objectifying him further and was still effective

this is part of a wider pattern already established by Helluva Boss, where abuse is treated in the least sensitive, most sledgehammer blunt and cartoony way possible.

going by HB, abusers are:

always obvious and easy to spot,

they're complete monsters devoid of any life or interests of their own,

they have no inner lives whatsoever because they only exist to hurt the victim (Stella stays around the house despite not liking Stolas, Crimson wants to force Moxxie into a gay marriage despite being homophobic - to the guy who put his son in prison in the first place!!) - they're inconsistent and unknowable,

they abuse their victim openly in front of others everyone goes along with and tacitly approves of it (Stella's friends happily laugh at her jokes disparaging a demon prince who could kill them all despite knowing he's in earshot)

they cannot be easily stopped even when they have far less power, either in magic or social standing, than the person they're abusing (Stolas and Stella, again)

they hang around long past when they should despite the cast having ample reason to proactively do something to stop them (everyone leaves Crimson alive despite killing all his minions, Stolas knows Stella has ordered a hit on him but probably still lets Octavia spend weekends with her??)

they are fundamentally Bad People. None of the 'good' characters can every be called out for being abusive, what they do is funny - because they are fundamentally Good People. It doesn't matter how many traits Stolas and Stella have in common, he is Good and she is Bad. It also doesn't matter that Stolas sexually coerced someone for a season and a half, neglected his daughter and abused his servants, and barely feels bad about his own infidelity. He is Good so anything he does can be excused. Same with Loona - beating people is bad, but it's OK for her to give her dad a black eye and beat his head in with a picture frame, because she's one of the Good Guys. Same with Blitzo demeaning Moxxie constantly in the workplace - it's funny when he calls Moxxie fat, it's abuse when Mammon does it to Fizz

Abusers are fundamentally Other from Us, and we never need to examine our own behaviors as long as we know we are fundamentally Good.

like how is any of this making the world a better place? or advancing the understanding of abuse? it's an embarassingly dated and in places actively harmful depiction of what abuse is or isn't (I don't even want to get into the bad takes I've seen surrounding Stol/tz and what coercion is or isn't, but you can probably add that to the list too)

if the Angel scenes are as brutal as they sound then the rating should be an 18. I don't entirely blame Viv for that, I know sometimes ratings boards have a weird habit of treating works that have LGBT content as somehow 'more adult' than movies with straight up rape and SA scenes in them (though HH is both, so idk how literal bondage gear didn't up the rating), but I hope against hope there's some kind of trigger warning for this somewhere, and it isn't just dropped on the viewer's lap in order to shock them further with the world's bluntest and most graphic animated scene of SA it can

This. All of this, every word.

re: your empathy posts. As someone who probably has higher than normal empathy (I used to ask people around me how they deal with sympathetic distress in common situations that occur in a job and only got blank stares) you're so valid!! The lionizing of this random subconscious process called empathy is so useless! It says nothing about the person and their values! As your other commenters suggested, people disparaging you may just be trying to boost their own shaky feelings about how their own emotional stability is deeply tied to their people-pleasing tendencies.

If anything, I think learning to function "normally" in society with "empathy" makes you more messed up. I understand this person's distress. I acknowledge it, and know how my actions will make it worse. I make them feel worse anyway, because that's the organizationally approved behavior, causing more pain for both them and myself. All the while I must behave as if I am cheerful and unbothered. Internalizing that hurting others and yourself to achieve your goals is Fine is necessary in order to stay sane. This is counter to everything people say they believe, so lying also has to become a virtue.

Buying kindness from the store seems like a really kind thing to do tbh. I am passing you on the street as I am schlupping over to pick up some callousness.

this last sentence made me giggle a lot. but YEAH!! a lot of this is spot-on to stuff i've been thinking about lately. like, "normal" empathy levels seem to be socially defined as "you care about people and want to help them, but you don't care so much that you'll harm yourself in pursuit of that" and it's all just..... i dunno. so much pathologizing of how we think and feel and whether we're Human (TM) about stuff. it's all so Weird

like..... i keep thinking that my lack of empathy gives me certain advantages in social situations. but in a similar vein to the ppl worried about sounding like tiktok empaths for being hyperempathetic, i worry that this makes me sound like an alpha male influencer writing youtube essays about why emotions make you weak, or whatever.

it's not that emotions make people weak or that having less empathy makes me like, a Cold Logical Calculating Math-Loving Strategist. i'm a writer who focuses solely on character-driven stuff, u probably wouldn't expect that from a stereotypically sociopathic person. part of why i LIKE writing character-driven stuff so much is BECAUSE i've had to actively teach myself how other people think, how they feel, how they struggle, etc

a lack of empathy means i can choose not to get invested in other people's feelings or lives, i don't feel guilty for emotionally disconnecting, i'm not afraid of being disliked. but i still know how to act like a decent human being. there's that one post about how stupid it is not to realize being nice gets people to be nice back, and fuckin. YEAH!! it's astonishing to me to read about cases of """clinical sociopaths""" (who are just people who didn't get the 'pretend you give a shit, moron' memo) manipulating and gaslighting people and whatnot. everyone in the comments will always be like "ooo so scary... they didn't feel bad at ALL... so terrifying that people who don't feel guilt exist..." and i'm like.

IS GUILT THE ONLY THING THAT KEEPS YOU FROM COMMITTING ATROCITIES???

BLOWS MY MIND. IT'S LIKE..... THE LEFTIST EQUIVALENT OF SAYING EVERYONE WOULD BE MURDERERS IF THEY WERENT SCARED OF GOD. LIKE. YOU ONLY AVOID DOING BAD STUFF BC IT MAKES YOU FEEL BAD??????

good LORD. at least having no empathy means i've had to grow my principles organically. oh my GOD.

anyway what brought these thoughts up today was that i was thinking about gansey and luz noceda, since theyre extremely similar characters & on my All Time Faves list. and i've said this before but the things i love about them (the kindness, self-sacrificing shit, anxiety, etc) are things i don't see in myself. but Wish I Did. like i wish i was kinder on the inside than i am.

but i know that i admire ppl with luz and gansey traits both in fiction and in real life. so i simply just..... emulate the luz and gansey actions. not always successfully, esp because i have a temper and very little patience, but like. i try to be kind where i can bc i wish i was someone who tries to be kind when they can. so i'm just going to be. u know??

Counterpoint, hardly anyone likes Chelsea-Nerissa and would’ve preferred a teen-Chelsea having an interesting and fun dynamic with Ruby while making a neat parallel or foil or whatever to the kraken conflicts of old. People knew Chelsea was gonna be antagonistic of sorts, not flat out villainous since it feels weird to associate that with teens - they can do some horrid shit but that age is still a symbol of significant growth, change, independence, and whatnot so I think people were thinking or hoping for something more… interesting. More interesting than an adult posing as a teen at highschool validating a self-described warlord of an older generation lower views ( I swear she didn’t think too highly of humans at some point).

Ok but that counterpoint hinges on Chelsea ever being something more than just the straight up evil villain. Just because you wanted a fun high school girls dynamic does not mean that was ever the case. Simply wanting for something does not make it the better option.

To be a proper parallel or foil would change the entire core theme and plot of the movie to focus around the fallout of the war as I've said in previous posts. This was not the theme or direction they wanted to take the movie from what I've seen. They wanted a coming of age story for Ruby with a focus on her relationships with women in her life. Having to explain the backstory for the entire war from two angles so that we can see the fallout on both ends and how the girls stories differ from each other is a completely different movie plot. It just isn't the movie that they were making.

I had no issue associating Chelsea with being the big bad instead of a misguided youth. I also had no issue thinking she may be older than she appears and actually the Queen because a villain who's whole plan hinged on deceit,,, I had a feeling that she may be.... deceitful. There are totally adults who pose as peers of high schoolers in order to manipulate them. You keep on talking about Chelsea/Nerissa as if she is actually a teenager, and keep on wanting for her to have a character arc that a misguided teen would have, but in the version we got wasn't a teenager and was doing everything with clear intent and purpose. I don't know what to tell you about you feeling weird about assuming someone that appears to be a teenager is straight up the bad guy. Even if Chelsea remained a teenager, by the storyboards, she is still just straight up bad. Like in real life I would always err on the side of teenagers just being misguided and capable of growth and change, but this is a piece of fiction media in a genre where it's quite common for things to be more black and white than real life is. It really isn't an uncommon thing for the character that keeps raising the bad guy flags to just be the bad guy.

Yes Grand Mama is a warlord. But she isn't actively declaring and going to war on anybody herself. She mentioned how different entities or groups try to fight her for the position of ruler, but she never shows signs of or says that she instigated any confrontations. And despite being a warlord she does not seem to be actively trying to expand her territory.

Know who did want to have that throne and expand the territory by going full warlord on other people? Nerissa. Know who tried to do it again? Chelsea/Nerissa depending on the version. So yeah Grand Mama's views are validated. Wanting a movie where her views aren't validated, is once again, an entirely different plot and movie and nothing about the in-production stuff we've seen has indicated that was the case.

And yeah Grand Mama doesn't think highly of humans and we have no indication that her views have changed by the end of the movie. She thinks they are stupid and not worth spending time around. But when Ruby says "but I like humans" Grand Mama doesn't disparage her opinion or try to change Ruby's mind or tell her she's wrong in any way for liking humans. She doesn't try to change anything about how Ruby wishes to interact with humans, or to see the error of her ways, and that's probably because humans haven't tried to usurp and wipe them out. Yeah she doesn't like them, but there is no reason for her to change Ruby's mind. She doesn't try to. They have different opinions and that's fine.