i saw your post saying that people who ship incest and headcanon dazai as liking that stuff are obviously going to be harrassed. I don't headcanon dazai as liking daddy kiddy stuff, but i want to ask how you think writing about that makes a person bad. because dazai has literally committed AT LEAST child abuse(akutagawa), 136 murders, 312 extortion cases, 625 cases of fraud and more. but if you think authors deserve to get harrassed for writing about sick crimes like incest because they support or like such things, then why aren't you harrassing asagiri for writing about all those things? and I've seen alot of people that act like sex crimes are somehow different from torture and murder. so I'd like to ask this. do you approve of cheating irl because you act like people who write about sexual related immorality are condoning it and then you say that you might write about cheating in your fic request rules. Also, If you're deep in the bsd community then you may have read no longer human, in which it is heavily heavily implied(to the point that there's literally no other explanation for what happened to her exept rape) that yozo's wife,yoshiko, was raped. do you believe that the irl dazai approved of rape?

I don't mean to come off as rude or argumentative, so sorry if i do, im genuinely curious.

I'm sorry but, are you stupid? you're asking why someone is a bad person for writing incest, pedophilia and rape content. OFC SOMEONE IS A BAD PERSON FOR WRITING THAT KIND OF STUFF. If someone writes it they normalize it, and normalzing disgusting shit like that is VERY harmful.

Its kinda dumb that you are compering Dazai, a fictional character to real people, Dazai is not a real person, so his actions don't effect real people, but people who make incest do effect real people. As someone who is a victim of sa, its very triggering to see incest, pedophilia, rape ect content being made of my favorite character. Making that type of content is normalizing it, and if we normalize kids being raped by someone they're close to, then its gonna end up making younger kids think that its okay if that happens to them.

"but if you think authors deserve to get harrassed for writing about sick crimes like incest because they support or like such things" i never said to harass the writers, i said that if they are gonna write that shit they need to be able to handle the hate, and yes they deserve hate for making it, and saying its for coping isn't a valid excuse, because they are hurting other victims at the same time.

"I've seen alot of people that act like sex crimes are somehow different from torture and murder" They are different, rape is done by the attacker so that they can feel sexual pleasure. And sadly in some cases, like junko furuta, people get raped, tortured and murdered for no reason. But still torture and rape are still different, and i don't know why you're bringing up torture and murder when this is about incest content.

"do you approve of cheating irl because you act like people who write about sexual related immorality are condoning it and then you say that you might write about cheating in your fic request rules." The answer is no, just because i said i MIGHT write for it doesn't mean i will, its meant as "in some cases i might write it" and even if you don't condone incest, rape and pedophilia irl, its stil very much wrong and disgusting and people who write it should really feel guilty about it, if you have thoughts about that stuff you need to seek help, not normalize and spread it around the interent. Also cheating and incest/rape content aren't comperable btw, one is a crime and the other one is breaking someones trust.

Now the book part, i have the book but i haven't read it, and bringing the real life dazai, into this is stupid, he lived over 70 years ago, people thought differently about rape back then so its hard to know. also the book is a fucking autobiography so ofc its gonna talk about stuff that happened in his life

Anyways please tell me if anything in here is wrong or if you wanna add anything to this

Btw saying "sorry if i come of as rude" after compering me to weirdos is something! 🥰

"the General's unjust interference, so far from being really injurious to their felicity, was perhaps rather con- ducive to it, by improving their knowledge of each other, and adding strength to their attachment"

I was thinking about this quote. Did Jane Austen mean by "adding strength to their attachment" that Catherine and Henry's attachment was not a strong one before the Colonel's interference ?

Colonel seemed more involved in Henry's "courtship" of Cathy than Henry himself. And her feelings for him seemed more like infatuation or teenager crush than a real steady love. Add to that that line about Henry being interested in Catherine because she liked him. And the proposal seemed to me more due to him feeling guilty for leading her on and making fall in love with him and taking responsibility for his father's obvious hints about a wedding. You know the " honor bound " thing. I mean he did mean it and he liked Catherine well enough.

Do you think that Austen meant that their relationship became strong after the Colonel delayed their marriage ?

To understand the last paragraph of Northanger Abbey, you have to remember that this is a satire and Jane Austen is being a bit more blunt than usual in this last bit. I will highlight the jokes:

Henry and Catherine were married, the bells rang, and everybody smiled; and, as this took place within a twelvemonth from the first day of their meeting, it will not appear, after all the dreadful delays occasioned by the General’s cruelty, that they were essentially hurt by it. To begin perfect happiness at the respective ages of twenty-six and eighteen is to do pretty well; and professing myself moreover convinced that the General’s unjust interference, so far from being really injurious to their felicity, was perhaps rather conducive to it, by improving their knowledge of each other, and adding strength to their attachment, I leave it to be settled, by whomsoever it may concern, whether the tendency of this work be altogether to recommend parental tyranny, or reward filial disobedience.

Green: Austen jokes about this delay earlier, "The anxiety, which in this state of their attachment must be the portion of Henry and Catherine, and of all who loved either, as to its final event, can hardly extend, I fear, to the bosom of my readers, who will see in the tell-tale compression of the pages before them, that we are all hastening together to perfect felicity." So the joke is that we, as readers, know it will end happily and we know it will end happily soon, because there aren't that many pages left.

Blue: It is extremely common in fiction for the protagonists to be brought closer together by interference instead of being torn apart by it, so General Tilney, in opposing marriage, strengthens the probability of it happening. He plays his stock character part very well in this story. It's a meta joke because it is so inevitable in this sort of narrative that it makes his actions silly.

Purple: Novels in this era were supposed to have a moral, but Austen jokes that her moral may be interpreted as "disobey your parents" or "be a tyrant to your children" to come to the happy conclusion. Obviously, that's not the real moral of her story, but what a cursory reading may lead someone to think.

To understand Henry and Catherine's love story, you need to know that at the time, men were supposed to have feelings first and women second, developing them as gratitude for the man liking them. So the "proper" order is:

Man has feelings

Man expresses feelings

Woman develops feelings in gratitude

Now this is extremely silly, since it's not like a girl won't develop a crush on her own. Austen is mocking this particular order of events. She's not saying that Henry Tilney doesn't love Catherine, he does, she's saying that the love happened in a wrong and scandalous order.

She was assured of his affection; and that heart in return was solicited, which, perhaps, they pretty equally knew was already entirely his own; for, though Henry was now sincerely attached to her, though he felt and delighted in all the excellencies of her character and truly loved her society, I must confess that his affection originated in nothing better than gratitude, or, in other words, that a persuasion of her partiality for him had been the only cause of giving her a serious thought. It is a new circumstance in romance, I acknowledge, and dreadfully derogatory of an heroine’s dignity; but if it be as new in common life, the credit of a wild imagination will at least be all my own.

That is why it's harmful to Catherine's dignity, because she DARED to have a crush. And obviously, Austen knows this happens all the time, which is why she jokes about it.

I hope that answered everything.

Made the mistake of taking a peek at genshin fandom beyond the tiny tiny little circle I've cultivated on my dash..... never again *shudders*

Another realisation about Solomon post? Yes.

But First!

Let's talk about MC and Mammon's friendship (like I haven't spoken about it enough)

(platonically) general MC is probably the closest with Mammon:

• Beel mentions this in early S1 - saying that MC frequently seeks Mammon out to talk with him

• Levi mentions this in both S2 and Nightbringer

• Belphie briefly implies it in a chat

• Mammon has spoken about it multiple times

• Mammon & MC have been sharing a room frequently enough for him to leave his toothbrush and phone charger in their room from early S1 all the way up to S4

• His birthday is the only one they took charge and planned on their own, starting the gift giving a whole week before the actual date

• He's the only person in the circus event that they instantly remembered without having to talk with him first

• He's the first one in Nightbringer to fully accept them and start bringing them into the family shenanigans

• There are dialogue options like this, that aren't really options at all

• He's always their first - their first friend in every timeline and alternate universe

Okay so, now to the actual point of the post:

Solomon (in Nightbringer) asks MC if they've made any progress towards making the new pacts and MC says they're working on Mammon.

We know, obviously, why MC picks Mammon:

• He's their first. Not only does it seem like the right thing, they know him enough to know he'll throw a huge tantrum if he wasn't their first

• He's the safest and easiest option (I speak about this in more detail here) but basically he's the most settled after the Fall, the least likely to react badly or in anger, the least likely to accidentally hurt them and an extremely loyal ally (post here)

• Most importantly, he's their friend and they genuinely just like spending time with him

Solomon however, says something along the lines of picking Mammon being a smart choice because Mammon seems lonely.

Solomon's first thought was to see MC and Mammon's relationship from a strategic point of view. He saw a weakness (a true weakness btw, I actually have half a fic written from a year ago about Mammon being lonely in the Celestial Realm and I really need to complete it) and he exploited it to get what he wanted - similar to how he made a pact with Asmo in the present day timeline.

Solomon saying/doing this isn't really a bad thing, but I think it really adds to his character and shows his differences when compared to MC. It also really adds weight to the whole:

• locked away in a basement and hidden from the world during his childhood

• had one childhood friendship which is implied to have ended badly

• spent thousands of years without any real friends despite the fact that he had at least three people (Asmo, Barbatos and Thirteen) who genuinely cared for him

• admitted to not seeing the demons he made pacts with as friends until either s3 or 4, despite the fact that, even pre-series, Solomon is one of the people Asmo genuinely likes, cares about, values the opinion of, wants to impress and initially feels nervous around because of this

I just...

I love it when they give you a smiley and chill, kinda goofy, character whose past is a little mysterious and then you figure out oh he's got a tragic past and also his world view and thought processes are very messed up but also a product of his past

10/10 character actually

Relevant Posts:

• Solomon's World View and Thought Processes

• How Solomon's Past Shaped Him

for the ask game: 🧡🖤💚

🧡: What is a popular (serious) theory you disagree with?

Until I see definitive proof that Ludinus is in fact as old as he wants people to believe he is, I will not believe it. I don't even really have an opinion on how old he is; I just don't think he's as old as he tries to suggest. And lest it be said that I am playing favorites, the thing about Ludinus is that he talks the way Essek talks in 91—and there are a lot of things Essek says at that dinner that I take with a good heaping of salt. It's this sense that they're talking around things that they would rather people not question; they're both very skilled at talking around things in a way where they aren't outright lying, but they'd rather you not think too hard about it because there's shit they're not saying. To be clear I also won't be mad if there does turn out to be some evidence in canon that he is that old, but thus far, there is nothing definitive, and I do not take the word of unreliable NPCs at face value.

🖤: Which character is not as morally good as everyone else seems to think?

I don't think this is really an unpopular opinion at this point, but Jester. Nice =/= good. I don't think she's evil, by any means! But her morality is a lot more complex than it's given credit for and I think it's one of the things that is most interesting about her. I'd actually consider her largely amoral; it's just not really an axis of consideration that she worries about. She doesn't want people to hurt her or her friends and she doesn't want something to destroy the world, but otherwise she doesn't really care much about what someone's morality is. "Just don't be evil to me" is an incredible sentiment for a reason. She cares more that Essek said they were his friends than the fact that he's the traitor they've been looking for. Ludinus is so insignificant to her despite his literally world-spanning evil plots that she has basically forgotten him six years later, even though two members of her friend group have spent the last six years trying to pin him down. Jester is hilariously amoral and I love that for her.

💚: What does everyone else get wrong about your favorite character?

[cracks knuckles] OKAY, this is where I've got receipts, because hooo boy do I have an opinion and I will be proving it.

Essek does not have an opinion on the Prime Deities. He does not really have much of an opinion on religion. He actually does not by the end of the campaign have any real issue with the Luxon, and frankly he primarily expressed issue with the Dynasty's worship because, until he got to Aeor, he wasn't certain that the Luxon was a real entity at all—which he contrasts against the Prime Deities, in fact!—and he seems to believe there is compelling evidence in Aeor that categorically disproves his hypothesis that the beacons are simply constructed Age of Arcanum devices.

Originally he is mostly concerned that the Luxon religion is used as a "crutch" which is "distracting them from what other good things they could do with the time and focus". He does specify that any religion can be used as such, but he only remarks upon the one he knows. His theory about the beacons, as of episode 91, is that they may be "artifacts designed in the Age of Arcanum that have been misread" that could be put to even further use.

He also does parrot the Dynasty party line in their first meeting about the Luxon being "the basis of how we've been able to free ourselves from the binds of the lineage the Betrayer Gods left for us", and while I do not take him at face value here (see the above commentary about unreliable NPCs), I doubt the truth of this statement is lost on him, considering his familial connections to Bazzoxan, which I can only imagine would not exactly endear one to the Betrayers, though this is only conjecture. If we do care to take him at his word here, it's not unreasonable, since he obviously has a lot more interest in the power offered by the beacons than anything else.

With all that being said, his tune on the Luxon itself has at least changed by the time they get to Aeor. He discusses iconography found in Aeor and when prompted by the Nein about whether the beacons were created by mortals, says, "I do not believe that they are made by anyone but the Luxon. They are of the Luxon. But they've been around since the Luxon's been in Exandria, which is the beginning."

So we started with him largely apathetic to religion, uncertain if this god was real, and by the time we circle back to him, he has now sided fairly definitively with the fact that the Luxon is an entity that has been around since at least the Founding. (For those keeping track at home, this is longer than Predathos has been around. In the Dynasty's creation myth, it may also have been around before the Prime Deities arrived, which is technically not incompatible with the creation myth of Exandria at large, but I digress.) Like most of Exandria, and as is perfectly reasonable for both his culture and his region, he probably doesn't have any love for the Betrayer Gods, but doesn't express much opinion if any on the Prime Deities. He has no time for religion, but frankly, he doesn't have time for much except for his own research, so it's hard to really ascribe any noted contempt to that.

Like, look, I've written plenty of religious trauma Essek fic, and I don't doubt that that element of it exists, but overall, in terms of canonical statements, it's pretty tame.

With that being said, I do want to fast forward a bit to draw attention to something else. Because I actually do think he ends the campaign with some measure of respect for, at the very least, the Wildmother.

In 140 after the Raise Dead fails, he talks briefly with Fjord about the unfairness of it. Fjord passively directs him to "if you were to ask my wise friend Caduceus..." Immediately after this exchange, Essek challenges Caleb to not accept defeat, and admits he wishes there was more that he or any of them could do, but concedes that, "Unfortunately, this type of magic is beyond my purview."

Immediately after this exchange, Caduceus asks for divine intervention.

Of course, he then spends several weeks gardening in a temple to the Wildmother, and seems to find some genuine clarity and perspective there, but I think this alone is enough to argue that, for a person as driven by empirical evidence as Essek, this sequence of events in 140 would be plenty to earn a wizard's respect.

So my formal belief is that Essek is not in fact anti-god or anti-religion, let alone against the Prime Deities. My opinion is that it's very easy to imagine him on his post-campaign travels leaving a small offering at any shrine of Melora he might pass, not out of actual worship but as a sign of respect.

The very annoying thing about attempts to demonize Ed is they're very often not only willfully ignoring the genre and obvious framing of the text, they're so very, very obtuse with the context of the story. Everyone in this show is a pirate and we cannot directly map their pirate actions into the real, modern world without it becoming incoherent.

Characterizations of Ed where he flies into a violent rage with zero provocation and is out here in modern AUs killing people aren't just out of character, they're incoherent. The show very specifically does not ask us to map real-world morality onto pirates (that's why we get lovable characters like Roach begging to torture hostages and it's framed as funny and neutral). Doing things like crashing wedding boats and setting ships on fire are Things Pirates Do; it's obviously intentional that Stede will watch a boat set themselves on fire and laugh and only get concerned when it's brought up that Ed does it because of Ed's hang-ups around violence. Further, things like killing colonizers are always depicted in the show as morally absolutely fine, which is a very sexy choice of them

But my point here, really: Ed's behavior in his kraken spiral was "a bit much." If we map this over to a modern restaurant AU, Ed's not going to phyiscally hurt anyone - he's suddenly firing Lucius, locking Stede's crew out of the building, and making his own crew work longer hours with poor scheduling. The mutiny happens when Ed tries to goad the crew into unionizing and forcing him out by ranting about having a huge deal on the weekends with mandatory overtime and Jim's finally had enough and pelts him in the forehead with a bag of coffee beans. Stede comes back to find him face-down in the kitchen with everyone panicking and while he's in the hospital being treated for his concussion Ed has to promise to let Lucius be the boss for a day to make it up to him. For the rest of their lives every time Ed suggests a business decision Jim doesn't like they say "don't make me bean you again, old man." Ed's crime was being a shitty boss and trying to make his friends hate him, not being an uncontrollably violent monster.

Ed's violent behavior reads as ooc when it's applied uncritically to AUs because that behavior is both a function of his occupation and not something that he will ever do unless goaded and provoked past a point where he can't ignore it, and without both aspects it just doesn't make sense. In contrast, with antagonistic characters like Izzy in season 1, similar behavior to canon doesn't read as ooc on its face because Izzy's biggest things had nothing to do with the context of piracy (being a power-hungry guy who's quite terrible with power, voicing toxic masculinity, goading Ed into self-destructive behavior).

i have compassion for Fitz Vacker in the same way I have compassion for Child stars in Hollywood.

He is perceived as a living dream, while he exists in a nightmare that people have so little understanding and empathy for. There's a level to him that is fundamentally unrelatable to most. He has no perceived lacking. At least, not when you're taking in the situation at face-value.

And this^ way of seeing him is fundamentally isolating. It strips him of depth and realness, and it makes him into an image to ascribe ideas and false perceptions onto. A blank canvas to project all of your worst insecurities . After all, He's not real- it doesn't hurt him, right? In fact, it's trendy among the lower class to dislike him. If you aren't obsessed with him to the point of a parasocial relationship, then you resent him. He cannot struggle or have any issues whatsoever because the perception of what luxury is, is so powerful.

This is reflected in the way Dex saw the Vacker's in books 1 and 2. It's reflected in the fandom's inability to empathize with Fitz is any way shape or form (at least on Pinterest/YouTube/Instagram)

He's socialized more around adults than his peers, because of the idea of giftedness and notoriety. Which just puts him on a higher pedestal, and makes him a larger target to hate among kids his age.

He is known, but he is not known. If anyone pursues him as a friend, it is for the sake of making connections and being popular. It's disingenuous. It's to use him as a stepping stool on a rapid rise to fame. to exploit him for personal gain. His trust issues don't come from nowhere, after all.

He had one friend his entire childhood. and what do you know? It's a kid who is trying so hard to outrun the exploitation of his dad's dreams and wishes for him.

Sure, Fitz's parents are present in his life, but they can only mitigate so much of the outside world before it starts seeping right through the walls of their home.

I just think it would be so strange to have so many people barely know you and either obsess over you to the point that you are more fantasy than reality, or resent you so much that you can't say a word without hearing some snide comment in response. And to know that NONE of it is real. None of these people know you.

Fitz's family obviously represents a really big issue in society. Because Dex, Sophie etc... they are RIGHT, that the standards of their world aren't fair. They are right to call it out. They are right to have anger towards the 'upper class' who does nothing to help the lower class. It's understandable. and it's far more relatable than Fitz's situation. but the thing is, shame is shame. and scorn is scorn.

the upper class may whisper. But the lower class does too.

and that's just it. Therein lies the issue with the lost cities.

IT"S NO ONES CHOICE. It was not Dex's choice to born into a bad match marriage, it was not Keslar and Juline's choice to be born in a world where a system like mathmaking even exists. It wasn't their choice to have triplets. But it also wasn't their choice to raise them in a society that hates them.

But no more was it Fitz's choice to be born a Vacker. No more was it his choice that his parents happened to be a good match. It's not his choice to be born into a society where that stuff matters. He's a kid.

But because he represents something at face value that people tend to hate, he is undeserving of compassion when compared to a character like Dex. Fitz is dismissed and disliked because he represents something about their society, even though he's a child who has no real way to combat what generations older than him have enforced.

He is the vessel that is easy to target and to hate, because people need to find someone to blame. Even if that person technically has not contributed in any way to the thing that the people wish to destroy.

and it can only cause resentment to build between the two classes.

Idk man the perception of Fitz Vacker will forever have my head spinning.

The sins not being really sinful and how I would rewrite them

So we have met four of the seven deadly sins so far and I feel like three of them were pretty mishandled.

I have seen a lot of people talk about how the sins were really undermined and don't really present each of their sins well. We know Asmodeus as the sin of Lust, Beelzebub for Gluttony, Mammon for Greed and Lucifer as the leader of hell and the sin of Pride. And in my opinion the only one who makes sense as one of the seven deadly sins is Mammon.

He might be one of my favourite characters from either show because he is genuinely entertaining and is the only sin we've seen so far who fits the description. Lucifer has nothing that says pride about him (though that might not be explored in HH as the sins are more relevant in HB). And for Beelzebub and Asmodeus the scenes people often refer to when talking about them not fitting their sin are the one were Beelzebub worries about Blitzø when hes partying too hard and the one were Asmodeus talks about lust not being about force and agreeing with consent.

It seems to not make sense as to why the embodiments of gluttony and lust would care about someones well being or consent. Because a lot of people argue that the inherent idea of a sin is to be hurtful and not good. Which makes sense because someone partying and indulging in wild behaviour occasionally or someone following their desires and acting on them aren't things that are necessarily bad. It only becomes bad when it becomes too much and one starts hurting others and affecting them negatively.

That is why most people would agree that Mammon is the best written sin, because he actually gets to be an asshole and we get to see the negativity of his Greed. But to me there is more to it than that.

One thing I saw being brought up is that the sins would obviously want people to want to indulge in them. That's why Beelzebub wanted Blitzø out of her party, because he was ruining the vibe for the others with his obnoxious behaviour. And also why Asmodeus wouldn't want sexual assault to happen, since then only one person would want to experience lust. So while this makes sense it still ignores the fact that sinning is something bad you shouldn't do.

For me it should be shown as something you would wanna do, but also as something you shouldn't because you either hurt others or yourself. This is why I liked how Mammon was presented. He encapsulated the ideas of both sides. We got to see why someone would want to be like him, through seeing that he makes people happy with his shows and the obviously wealthy lifestyle he lives which is desirable for others to have. But we also got to see the side of his character that qualifies him as a sin, when we see how he treats Fizzarolli and we get to understand why one shouldn't be all Greedy like him, because it hurts others.

Mammons writing (wether intentional or not in that regard) is very good at showing us the good and bad sides to being Greedy. And while some people might say that the sins should only be presented as negative (which is also fine), I think it would also be good to show us why someone would want to be involved with the sin in the first place.

For Beelzebub and Asmodeus the issue is mainly that we don't really dive into the bad sides of their sin. That is mostly because these are characters Vivzepop doesn't want to present as negative which isn't necessarily bad in theory but it then makes no real sense as to why they would be sins.

Gluttony is all about overindulgence. It's something being too much. And the partying presents that well, but when Beelzebub starts to tell Blitzø to stop it stops feeling genuine, because he is basically doing what her sin is all about and she has a problem with it. Beelzebub's situation was pretty easy to fix as well. I would've just written it so that she doesn't care about Blitzø when he gets all drunk. It would be clear why Gluttony is something a Demon would want to indulge in, with partying of course being fun and sometimes you just needing to let loose. But the excessive drinking and the chaos that Blitzø causes while he obviously isn't okay would show why you should never be gluttonous like her, because it's destructive and unhealthy.

The Demons at the party and Beelzebub should hype Blitzø up and encourage him to keep going, while Loona realizes that this isn't good and would force Blitzø to leave for his own well being.

In Ozzies case it's a bit more difficult because what some people take issue with is the fact that he cares about consent. And im not going to say that they have to make him agree with rape for him to represent Lust. But we also never get to see bad sides of his sin. I feel like that is something that could be solved with the show acknowledging that Lust isn't just about sex. While it is often purely associated with that it's actually more about satisfying your desires and acting on your needs without care for others. That can also be in regard to money, possessions or status.

They could've made Asmodeus purely care for what he desires (for which they wouldn't necessarily have to focus on sex) and show how that might be affecting Fizz. Then we could see that the good sides to Lust include satisfying your needs and experiencing pleasure, which is why someone would want to indulge in it. But also that just taking what you want isn't good for other people, which is why you wouldn't want to do that.

And Lucifer is just not representing his sin at all. Atleast I didn't recognize anything that has to do with pride from how he was characterized. In my opinion they could have just gone full out bad for how he presents his sin. Because pride is often interpreted as the original and therefore worst sin Lucifers reason for not being active with leading hell or interacting with his daughter could just be that he is too prideful to do that.

Otherwise I wouldn't mind giving him the same treatment as how the other sins sould be treated in my opinion. Maybe the good thing about him is that due to his pride the demons view him as a worthy and strong leader who they respect, while his pride is also what causes him to not interact with Charlie since he sees himself as too good for that.

Though I get that this would basically change his whole character and that that would involve showing him to be flawed and not just the silly little guy Viv wants him to be (I would prefer it like that but idk).

That's why I think the sins we have been introduced to so far don't really work and how I would rewrite the them so that they would be more like my love Mammon.

Because some people need to understand it

I'm posting this because I'm bored of seeing people (including part of KmHn shippers) saying that KomaHina is "problematic", "abusive" or "toxic" and treating it like if it was canon while it isn't.

KomaHina isn't a "problematic" or "toxic" ship. Unlike some people are stating (probably due to their headcanons, misunderstanding or in result of completely ignoring Komaeda), Hinata and Komaeda's canon relationship wasn't abusive. Their canon relationship is complicated but not abusive. You're allowed to headcanon them as having an abusive/toxic relationship but stop pushing it down other shippers' throats because according to canon they had lots of misunderstandings towards each other AND they wanted to understand each other better. They both cared about each other. Seriously, a complicated relationship of two (or more) characters doesn't make it problematic in any way. Problematic is one thing and complicated is another (both can overlap but not always and their relationship is an example for a complicated but not problematic one).

KOMAEDA

Komaeda wasn't a yandere or dorodere. He didn't want Hinata exclusively for himself. He didn't hurt anyone Hinata was close to (oh, wait, he didn't have any friends, everyone was remembering Hinata when they wanted something from him or just were some programmed AI but still it doesn't change the fact he didn't try to separate Hinata from the rest). On the contrary. He asked Hinata to kill him so he would get a chance to escape. He never tried to make Hinata believe the same way as him. He wasn't selfish. Do you remember Komaeda telling Hinata that he's in love with him? Before the fourth class trial he tells Hinata: "why do I care about you?" His confession is the answer why he cared about him. (remember: FTEs are canon what is explicitly showed in the case of locking Imposter's last FTE until Island Mode and locking Komaeda's scenes if Hinata didn't spend time with him during the first day). Komaeda wasn't obsessive about Hinata, he simply wanted to help the one he loved. He said that just the fact of their eyes meeting was enough to make him happy.

His jokes shouldn't be taken seriously. He was literally making no idea that it could be taken as an offense while it wasn't his goal to offend anyone and he was making no idea when someone was offending him ("winning personality? Are you praising me?")

He will be happy

After completing the Final Dead Room, Komaeda says: "he will be happy! I was finally useful!" what obviously refers to Hinata. To it, he was shocked about learning that Hinata was a reserve course student.

You aren't the traitor, are you, Hinata-kun?

There's an optional interaction in Chapter 5 after Komaeda's announcement of staying at the restaurant. If you go back there and interact with him, he's surprised and then says: "people like you will be devoured by them" (not an exact quote) what could mean he learned about his actual identity as Kamukura and was warning him but there's also a possibility he remembered the situation from before the program of him and Kamukura talking (Kamukura is Hinata so he could easily match both appearances).

HINATA

Do you want Hinata's side? Here you are: Hinata never hated Komaeda. He even wanted to forgive him after learning about him being terminally ill (I'll go back to this part later in the post) and just was confused like everyone else but unlike the rest he knew the real Komaeda – that traumatized, terminally ill guy and the thing Hinata wanted was to understand him. In chapter 4 when Komaeda tells Hinata that he "played" Russian Roulette Hinata is worried and shouts: "you could die!" Later, in chapter 5 after they force-opened the doors Hinata was scared to the point he couldn't move and later he was refusing to accept the fact Komaeda was dead. During the investigation when Hinata for the first and only time enters Komaeda's cottage, "All Star Apologies" is playing in the background when Hinata wonders what Komaeda was thinking and doing when he was still alive – he never was so deep in thoughts after someone's death as after Komaeda's death.

In the morning after the trial when he's informed about Komaeda's last will he's full of determination what is seen only if you interact with Komaeda's cottage. In chapter 6 when Hinata is reading about hope he says to himself that Komaeda's hope was the real hope. He wouldn't think it if he hated Komaeda. The ultimate confirmation of Hinata not hating Komaeda is SDR2.5 that was written by Kodaka (I'm mentioning it because DR3 wasn't) and you can see Hinata doing everything to wake Komaeda up of comatose. In the ending there was a party on a ship and they weren't participating in it. They were standing together away from the rest.

Is Komaeda's ghost whispering to you?

It's possible you don't remember this part because it happened during the class trial. It shows perfectly that though Hinata was trying to deny the feelings he had to Komaeda, he couldn't stop thinking about his wish to understand him.

ISLAND MODE

It's also interesting to take a look at Island Mode that is an alternative plot. It's full of Hinata caring about Komaeda and shows him being interested in him in a romantic way. Just see Komaeda's ending. Hinata is kind of disappointed when Komaeda stops and asks: "will you be my friend?" but later they're holding hands and it's not the only time they were doing that. They were also hand-holding two times in SDR2.5 and in UTDP once. If there wasn't comphet, they would obviously become a couple in Komaeda's ending because their relationship was developing in the most natural way in comparison to the rest (they actually were attracted to each other and Komaeda was never forcing Hinata to anything, and vice versa).

WHICH "DERE" KOMAEDA IS?

Going back to the part about Komaeda being ill. He's the perfect example of byoukidere – a character who's usually sweet but suffers of an illness. Komaeda was very sweet to Hinata but there were moments when symptoms of him being sick were appearing, "twisting" him (do you remember when Komaeda started "rambling about hope" and when he snapped out he was making no idea what was going on?) There was also a very important moment during Chapter 3 where he almost died of despair disease. Without following his FTE you won't understand why was his condition so bad. It was also the moment when Hinata was openly worried about Komaeda. Komaeda is also an utsudere. He was traumatized, suicidal and was initially masking it (he was taking the mask off while talking to Hinata).

"IT'S NOT CANON AND NEVER WILL BE"

Them being a couple is heavily implied by canon but it doesn't make them a canon ship. Yet, there's something that IS canon. They were attracted to each other in a romantic way and seriously, you don't need them to kiss on screen. Look at the scene above. If there was nothing between them, they wouldn't spend time like that when the rest was throwing a party. In my opinion, this is the moment of them being the closest to each other in the whole series. Sure, Hinata looks nervous but it can be easily explained by the fact that he was next to someone he "liked" while knowing the other person "likes" him back and Komaeda… Well, Komaeda is Komaeda.

»Click here« to read an anonymous comment to the post.

Update: 7.12 2023

i think a lot about scott in regards to both jimmy and pearl. like. i feel like not a lot of scott fans want to talk abt the fact that he’s actually very clever and manipulative and cowardly and just not very good!!

and it’s just something abt the fact that jimmy and pearl are some of the most loyal and loving people on earth. and yet they didn’t want him back. when scott asked jimmy to kill tango of all people. he said you should run. when he told jimmy to say i love you he said you have 30 seconds. and then it happened again. in secret life he told pearl he loved her and she wouldn’t say it back

i am just so in love with it. the fact that scott used jimmy and pearl and then tried to win them back after they didn’t need him anymore. the fact that he left his first two beloved partners in the series with a permanent bad taste in their mouth. i think he changed both their characters irreversibly and that they did the same to him and i needddd jimmy and pearl to talk about it

Yeees anon YESSSSSS you understand...

It's nothing I haven't expressed already, but the combination of serious topics like manipulation attributed to a minecraft series and Scott being the culprit of it makes it kinda taboo to talk about for a lot of people so I'm not surprised that people don't! (Scott being part of LGBTQ and thus attributing negative traits to his character makes you "insensitive" and such, unless you turn it into an AU lol, then it's fine apparently) And if these people are here just for something carefree and the CCs more than the characters, that's absolutely fine! And as I've also said before, Scott is a very compelling character to me and I absolutely don't hate him no matter the things I think he's done to change Jimmy and Pearl for the worse. I wanna know who hurt him...

But as far as my perception goes of the characters etc, yeah, it's this. Scott is terribly clever and skilled and frightfully good at manipulating whether he always intends to or not (he's more or less admitted to it anyhow). He's not often explicit but the kind of language he uses around Jimmy makes Jimmy feel talked down to, or that he's to blame for things, etc, and then sweetens it up with claims of caring. Statements that basically go "I do this for your own good" and such. He was obviously more explicit about it with Pearl but that doesn't make it any better haha

Jimmy's attitude towards Scott after third life is such an interesting thing to analyze and I'm so happy of his feelings manifesting more. In Double Life Scott had it out for the ranch and ofc Jimmy did what he could to defend the ranch's image etc, but oh boy, the LimL "you have 30 seconds" moment... Also when Jimmy was about to kill Scott for the time that Scott promised him, Scott said "I love you" again and "it's fine even though you didn't say it back" (paraphrasing) and Jimmy just fucking stays silent before going "appreciate it" and shooting him. Very fire of him. That made me so happy lmao. And him taking gradual enjoyment out of hitting Scott in Secret Life (as he deserves to). And the further moments you brought up, and now what happened in Real Life even if it was a one-off SMP. I hope he keeps going like this lol

There is the time in Secret Life where Jimmy seems to project onto Pearl in telling her to attack Skizz and be mean about it, sigh..m they just need to sit down and talk. I need this so desperately. They just need to get talking and it'll all work out from there, they can do it, I believe in them...

Either way both of them refusing Scott's approaches is the best thing ever. Scott should team up with people like Gem more instead who aren't affected by his bullshit anyway and also just make for fun dynamics

Hi I’m a new critter and I love your account and both your meta and your takes on “drama” I genuinely want to know (if you don’t mind saying of course) what you consider to be the most egregious, bad faith cr take that you’ve ever seen. I just like reading your criticism because it’s both incredibly articulate and smart but also very satisfying

Hi anon,

Thank you! I do have to say this is a difficult question with a boring answer but I'll give you a tangential one as well to make up for it.

Obviously, the misogyny and death threats in C1 are the worst! Anything that rises to the combination of structural oppression and literal death threats is going to be the worst, even before you factor in how utterly tiny the stakes were here (and, frankly, you shouldn't factor that in; doesn't matter what the cause is, big or small! Do not send death threats!)

The reason I tend not to talk about that is because there's very little to say. It's misogynistic death threats. That's awful, inexcusable, and dangerous in any context. But if someone doesn't understand how terrible this is, I don't think I can say anything to add to that.

Anyway because that was true, but obvious and not terribly revealing, I have been thinking a lot about mean-spiritedness in the fandom and I'll talk about that here. It's something I try to be cognizant of, because here's the thing: I talk a lot of shit. I'm aware I talk a lot of shit. There's many reasons why I talk a lot of shit. But I do try very hard not to be mean-spirited. I think there is a very clear distinction between criticism, even harsh criticism, of things you don't like, whether it's in execution, concept, or they just aren't to your taste; and mean-spiritedness, which is much more based in a desire to do harm to others.

I think again the example I've mentioned recently of people harassing Liam until he took a song off a Caleb character playlist is the pinnacle. This doesn't have any real goal re: criticism - it doesn't address an issue with the character nor the narrative and the only personal preference it reveals is "I, a random fan, don't like that this song was used in this context" which is not really relevant and you can skip it. Harassment is never justified, and even behavior that skirted harassment really served only to be a dick to Liam. It didn't have a single result other than "Liam takes the song off and feels kind of bad for a while," which I suspect was in fact the goal for most people, and that's pretty abhorrent.

Harsh criticism is not necessarily constructive, but it is with the intent to reveal - either a personal preference, or what you believe to be a flaw (structural, thematic, etc) within the story. It might not have a goal - personal preference really is just "I don't like this guy" and that's fine. Mean-spiritedness, however, exists just to spew bile and do harm.

So the following (most of which are paraphrased, but all are things I've personally seen on Tumblr alone, and nearly all are from the last year or so) aren't per se the most egregious or bad-faith takes, but they are absolutely mean-spirited. They have all destroyed my estimation of the people saying them for the most part beyond repair, and in many cases, if they have not hurt my estimation of the ship or character they were intending to support, they have certainly increased my estimation of the things they were intending to oppose. (And it goes without saying: any harassment - any - is automatically mean-spirited).

"I hope Fjord and Jester have divorced [author's note: they were not married] and I hope it hurt."

"I hope Caleb and that floaty fuck have broken up by the solstice."

"I hate Ashton, and Campaign 3 wouldn't be any different if they weren't there."

"My wishlist for this episode is that Chetney hits on Fearne and Ashton cockblocks him"

"I hope Fearne makes that robot eat his stupid coin"

"I'm not surprised that Yasha missed, because Yasha is bad at everything."

"Funny how Vex goes against her husband but does everything that Keyleth says" [Author's note: later proved to be hilariously untrue]

"No one cares about Travis's characters."

"Oh, Liam meant that Essek's own guilt would still exist by 'It won't help the inside?' I thought he was just being a fucking twat."

I think some people go into fandom not because they want to talk about characters, but because they see it as an opportunity to hit someone. I think some people believe they are entitled to a "win" (not normal to want nor possible to achieve and often less about the story and more about the fandom agreeing with them) and will engage in any tactic no matter how underhanded if they don't think they're getting it. That's what mean-spiritedness is in the end. It's not a single opinion, and often it goes under the radar compared to more stupid but less clearly unpleasant takes - a lot of the above didn't result in a ton of discourse because most people see these and rightfully go "oh that person is a tar pit" and block them - but it's certainly, outside of bigotry (which is also frequently also mean-spirited) - the most bad-faith approach to fandom on the whole.

Self Aware Thoughts

This is more world building thoughts so feel free to skip.

But like I'm so tired from doing cs shit today I didn't want to write any of the fics I was planning to write and instead I decided to just think.

Here's all of my favorite things that Self Aware AU would imply if it were in the real world (which obviously isn't possible but these are the logistics).

As I have learned through my very limited time as a computer science major, AIs probably won't have consciousness unless if we don't have unconsciousness. Much less lines of code in a game which aren't meant to be AI. Even though it's a really sick idea and I love when people write it like that. But let's say we still want the characters to become self aware and have it be slightly more possible and broaden the possibilities of Self Aware AU and speak the unspoken.

What is sort of implied, but never really said or sometimes thought, is that when characters become self aware it is no longer a game, even more so if the characters bring the player to their world or the player arrives in the game world. This means that their world and the player's world simultaneously exist, maybe in different universes or something. Which is pretty much what every AU has.

But wouldn't it be really cool if like the game characters invaded the player's world? I'm not talking accidentally teleported there but like straight up invaded, like bring their war ships and declare war on them? Or slowly infiltrate the world to get close to the player to either romance or kill them, whatever suits your boat.

Wouldn't it be interesting if one day Nanook (HSR) broke through the barrier of the universes in an attempt to destroy this one too? Just think of all the cool hijinks that could go on! And it's only because they became a game in your world, that they know your universe exists.

Now, this just brings up more questions. How are the characters (and thus the world) effected by the game? And how do we deal with the whole multiple players thing?

The latter I think is slightly easier to deal with, maybe each player has their own universe of the game, or for some reason the MC's game is a bit different, or Aha (HSR) just wanted to have some fun so they did this, or maybe there's a huge nefarious scheme that the player got wrapped into.

The first question is a bit more difficult and has larger implications for what the characters will feel toward the player. Does the player actually control the characters when they do in game combat is my poor boy Diluc (Genshin Impact) just suddenly teleported in front of Signora and forced to fight her? Well, that would probably upset some of the busier characters, it would make some of the characters would love fighting happier, and would scare off some of the other characters.

Overall in that scenario they become stronger, likely because the player builds them which should reinforce positive feelings about the player. But... they also have the chance to die and get hurt which they may resent the player for.

To which I suggest my ultra safe method of you don't actually put the characters in those scenarios because that's honestly horrifying. Imagine working you're working incredibly hard as the acting grandmaster of Mondstadt (Jean, Genshin) and suddenly you're expected to basically work overtime as the slave to this higher beings demands and face an immense amount of pressure, pain, and very scary beings.

Horrifying, personally I would hate the player. But it makes the player resemble a more deity like entity, so if that's the route you want to go then this may be the way of interacting with characters you're looking for.

So what can we use for these scenarios that aren't the characters? Well, we can say our actions for the most part don't effect them aside from giving them items or relics which they end up also receiving in their daily life and find their combat stats boosted yay! Maybe, when you're using them in your party they can hear your voice or see you, or get some hint to the fact they're in a video game. Overall, would probably leave a positive impression but some characters may straight up not notice because it's a bit more subtle.

Now, enter my current favorite option. Robots, doppelgangers, mannequins whatever you want to call them the player basically has a duplicate of the playable characters that acts as a robot, following their will. The robot copies and reflects the playable character's soul so buffs (items and stuff for the robot) are also given to the playable character. But since the robot can't really die or get hurt, the playable character remains unharmed.

On the other hand, if the playable character in canon gets harmed then unless if they're dead, it's fine since it relies on their soul, or state of mind, or consciousness even. If they die then they take refuge in your inventory, I talked about this briefly in another post I made speculating about dead characters and the self aware AU for HSR. Or if their mind becomes no longer their own or in the case of HSR mara-stricken then they can also take refuge there, imagine Blade (HSR) finding brief moments of peace in the times he's outside of his body and in this world of "the dead." They're sheltered there so the little robots remain functional.

It's even more subtle than the previous method I mentioned so let me explain why this is my current favorite.

It's partially just for the fear factor. Because it isn't actually that subtle considering you're moving your characters around exploring everywhere and everyone sees this strange gang of 4 robots that look eerily like celebrity figures following the Trailblazer or Traveler around. It's kind of funny but really horrifying especially for the playable characters.

Imagine going to go do the Fontaine quest and in the audience Furina sees herself stare back. Yeah.

Or in HSR going up to talk to Natasha as Natasha. Of course the robot's censor the character's real words so what's sent back to you are static options that always stay the same. You do not get to hear Seele curse out as she sees a robotic Bronya visit her, and instead are faced with the same dialogue options as always.

So I really love that take on how the player's actions affect self aware AU, and there's a lot of other ways you can probably do it too that I'm not mentioning but there's just so much untapped potential.

With not just accepting that when it's self aware the game isn't really a game anymore, and using that to your advantage. And also I wish more self aware AUs took advantage of how terrifying that would actually be, I want to see characters having mental breakdowns over this.

So that's the basic logistics of Self Aware AU I think that can make it really fun. But while writing this, I had another idea, because robots inspire me and for a moment I want to go back to that idea of how characters in a game can't have consciousness.

While characters in a game likely never will have consciousness because they aren't even programmed to learn what could come to have consciousness is AI. But that depends on what we define consciousness as. AIs take in data similar to the way humans take in experience through stories or life and then we both make decisions based off of those.

This can make some AIs very good at solving problems or making themselves appear a certain way, for example pretending to be self aware when in reality that's just them predicting what goes best next in a sentence given the context and what they're supposed to represent. Whether or not AIs can become conscious depends on whether or not humans are conscious and what we define consciousness as. Is it our moral code (which is also learned and AIs can replicate too) or emotions, is it the fact that we think and then from those thoughts choose what to say?

I don't know and probably never will. But, I'll say this if an AI is able to disobey its rules for something then I would guess that's consciousness. Now I'm not talking about a bug, because it is kind of impossible for machines to disobey rules for example you could write a statement like:

If (hurtHuman == true && protection == false){ then do new move or turn off}

To check if they're going to hurt a person and not out of self defense of another person and if they are then they have to do another action or power down. But chances are AI robots if we ever create them will probably have something that allows them to hurt other people if they need to protect their owner. And that idea of whether or not someone is a threat and if their owner needs to be protected will likely be decided on by data, and data can be biased. But if the AI finds a loophole where it can sort of argue that the owner needs to be protected because of X, when they don't really need to be protected, that's where I would guess it's close to consciousness.

Anyway all of that yapping about stuff I don't know too much about and for what?

I think a Self Aware AU set in the future where the characters consciousness (code) are put into robots so people can order their favorite characters and spend time with them would be really cool. And then we can make them conscious and it's kind of like Self Aware AU, they're not really in a game but they're the character and I think it's a super cool concept.

Robot boyfriend/girlfriend/partner for the win!!! Honestly may be something I end up exploring later on in the future, not sure if it'd classify as a self aware AU, probably not, but I think it was relevant to the topic because I was talking about robots earlier.

Anyway this was a lot of me yapping, if you read this far I'm pretty surprised because this is more so to get my thoughts out on paper so that way when I write self aware AUs I can add cool twists or introduce new concepts because there's a lot of potential in these and I think they're super fun :) Yay!

hello would you be willing to say your million opinions about the mystery twins?

WHY YES

I am unwell about these people thank you so much for asking /gen (long post incoming)

I'm a little more familiar with Cellbit's character than Bagi's, so probably have more headcanons about him. I am actively trying to get more unhinged about Bagi because she is so cool and everyone should tell me their Bagi headcanons

Bagi headcanons/opinions:

She should be transfem. as a treat. her being transfem lets me make the twins identical, and anything that makes it more obvious how related they are makes them funnier

Her being transfem also adds fun layers to her relationship with Tina, as Tina is a demon pretending to be human. All I'm saying is you could do some fun parallels and contrasts about presentation and the self

Also if you make her and Jaiden and Baghera all transfem, you get the fun fed-sisters-plus transfem solidarity that exists only in my head

She can only barely cook. She never learned as a kid and then got fucking frozen, and she's tried to learn as an adult but it's not going well

When she thinks about raising Empanada, she gets kinda caught between wanting to pass on the pacifist, live-and-let-live mentality that she pretends to have and the more defensive/aggressive ideas she actually has. She does like the idea of pacifism and doesn't want Empanada to grow up bitter, but... peace isn't what's kept her safe and alive

Empanada's first death resolved a lot of those conflicts. A kinder world isn't coming, so she has to raise a fighter

Her "pretending to be an ethical vegetarian" thing is hilarious to me. girl you aren't pretending to be a vegetarian you just are one. you can lie about your reasons but girl. you don't eat meat

Cellbit headcanons/opinions:

He can't cook even a little bit. Federation pet -> child soldier -> jail-> struggling adult? yeah he never fucking learned to cook

Relatedly I think he's a picky eater but has weird tastes. Like i think he eats instant microwave/just add water foods raw and likes it because he learned to eat it like that at some point, but can't stand a lot of "real food" because he just never got used to it (this is partly based on me lsjkhd)

He owns a butterfly knife and he's good with it. He picked it up as a hobby after Fuga when he was in therapy because he needed something to fill his time and it was a socially acceptable way to carry a knife. He can do all kinds of tricks now

Just pre-purgatory (and probably still now tbh) sometimes the butterfly knife suddenly reminds him too much of a real knife or triggers some kind of intrusive thought that scares him. His reaction to this is to just let go of the knife midair. He's very lucky no one's gotten hurt yet

He 100% remembers more of his childhood with Bagi than he admits. He pretends he doesn't because even acknowledging that he was a child once undermines his image of himself as a monster (upsetting, unhealthy self-image, sure, but one that's kept him safe. monsters aren't afraid of anything. monsters can't be hurt. children, though?)

As much as I understand and will read about autistic!Cellbit headcanons, I don't agree (i am autistic, for the record). He's actually really good with social cues, like scary good, and obviously has really strong theory of mind. Like I get where people are coming from but we need to defend an allistic guy's right to just be a fucking freak (/lh /nm)

I want to call Cellbit and Baghera "hunters" instead of "chainsaw killers." again I get where people are coming from. it's funny and I'll use it. however hunters would go so hard. same genre as codebreakers and bloodhounds. do you see my vision

Some people in the MLAATR fandom act like Sheldon is irredeemably creepy or gross or manipulative, and then uses examples of behavior that happens with all of the characters because it's an exaggerated children's cartoon.

Exhibit A:

To me, this is the same logic as saying "Jon Arbuckle is an animal abuser" because he lets Garfield drink coffee and sometimes puts him on a diet of a single lettuce leaf (I read the Jon Arbuckle hateblog for a laugh sometimes). Yes, obviously irl this would make someone an animal abuser, but in the silly world of Garfield these are just signifiers that the human reader, who might drink coffee or be on a diet that they hate, is supposed to relate to Garfield. Neither of these actually foods hurt him in the comic. Garfield eats entire trays of lasagna for crying out loud! Jim Davis even describes Garfield as being more like "a person in a cat suit" than a real cat. If we put the actions back in the context of the comic strip, Jon Arbuckle is just a pet owner who sometimes acts as a parent to a child, other times acts as Garfield's friend or roommate, and is kind of a dork but generally a good guy. Garfield and Odie's family.

Likewise, the world of MLAATR operates on cartoon/sitcom logic. Very often the characters will resort to lying, trickery, disguises, being aggressively friendly, etc. as ways to keep the plot and jokes rolling. I'm pretty sure every character has done this at some point, because of the humor potential. These are not meant to be looked at as abusive behaviors. You can usually judge how harsh the actions were based on other characters' reactions and how quick they are to forgive at the end rather than applying real-world relationship logic.

This is not to say that the writing is infallible or unable to be criticized because "it's just a kid's cartoon!" (I hate that argument, it's usually meant to silence people and that's not what I'm trying to do). Yes, cartoons can screw up in their messages, and you might be able to argue that maybe this writing style makes all of the characters bad role models for children. But if this is how you judge Sheldon, it's only fair to hold all the other characters in the same standards, including Jenny herself.

It bothers me that Sheldon gets the bad rep in the fandom because as an autistic person, especially when I was an autistic child, I related to both Jenny and Sheldon and their struggles in communicating/socializing in a world that glorifies popularity and being "normal" and hurts the weirdos to get them to conform. So it hurts on a personal level to see Sheldon get hated to such a high degree, and to hear people say Sheldon and Jenny would be an inherently unhealthy relationship, just because Sheldon can have some boundary issues and lack of social skills. I know people aren't saying this to villainize autistic traits, but that's how it can feel to me.

I could also get into how the show hinted that Jenny was at least a little curious about a relationship with Sheldon and that she might have gone for it if not for her fatal flaw in trying to seek popularity, but I'll save that for another post. This isn't meant to shame those who dont like the Jenny and Sheldon ship, but to give an alternative perspective to the whole "Sheldon is creepy!" thing I keep seeing in the fandom.

Kairi, Namine, Xion, and using their words

So KH has a lot of characters that are off-shoots of previous ones, and it can be fun to look for the parallels and the difference. While trying to figure out Kairi's "voice", I found it interesting to compare how the three "Kairi variations" used their words when experiencing overwhelming or negative emotions. How they handle these moments are very interesting.

Let's look at three memorable quotes by them, to show what I mean:

"Sora, let's take the raft and go. Just the two of us!"

Everyone talks about this line at some point. Like, what a weird thing for Kairi to say when we're still being introduced to her character! Riku's supposed to be her friend too, right?

Well, let's look at the context - not of everything that's going on around them, but of the conversation. What does she say right before?

"You know, Riku has changed."

Okay, so she's thinking about the ways Riku has been different now - probably in a way that upset or scares her. As other's have noticed, Kairi isn't as interested in leaving the islands (a safe place) as the others - an aversion to uncomfortable things. Riku is her friend, but it's not unbelievable a part of her wants to get away from whatever the change is that scares her.

So she has this mixed feeling about Riku, she tries to bring it up but ends up dancing around it, which Sora does not understand, obviously. Then, instead of explaining what she means, just jumps like, 10 steps ahead.

What this implies to me is that Kairi doesn't want to face this (any?) complex negative emotion head on. Maybe because it's her own fear and resentment? There's an element of avoidance of repression, here.

And then! And then as soon as it's out she immediately backtracks. Immediately laughs it off. "Just kidding!"

That makes it seem to me that her line about the raft was involuntary. She did not think ahead, maybe didn't even mean to say that at all, certainly regretted it as soon as she said it. It is definitely an expression of an honest, maybe a bit ugly, emotion she's experiencing, but is not the full context. It's certainly not the root of the issue. She's still dancing around it.

To summarize: either low levels of understanding of what she's feeling or some kind of repression, and involuntary use of words (meaning just about anything can come out)

"Nobody needs to keep a bunch of memories that aren't real, right?"

Oh, Namine. So we all agree this is a bit passive-aggressive, right? But also, I think, a bit genuine.

She is very aware that she caused this situation, and that she hurt Sora first. She's trying to acknowledge that she understands, but... she just can't help giving it a passive-aggressive edge.

Namine is all about repression (and also self-loathing, but that's not this conversation). She basically spends her entire life in a cage, having to make herself small. If we extrapolate even further, she probably spends a lot of time in her head thinking about her own situation and maybe even her feelings. That awareness could even be seen as a survival skill, in her situation.

She knows she did wrong and she knows she's upset. She tries to prioritize one over the other - but unsuccessfully.

So what we get with Namine is high awareness of her feeling, and an attempt to use her words constructively, but her control slips and some involuntary messaging slips through.

"So, do you hate me for taking your friend away from you?"

Xion uses her works like knives, seriously. There's a hint of this in her "Or what? They'll turn me into a dusk?" line with Axel, but I thought I'd use this quote instead.

I think I maybe mentioned this in another post somewhere, but in conflict Xion has a conversational pattern that goes "soft soft soft GOES FOR YOUR THROAT" that shows up multiple times throughout Days.

So, set-up for this conversation. Xion is suddenly getting a lot of answers and thus processing a lot of information, a lot of which I think confirms her own brand of self-loathing.

But what she turns around and says is not about her feelings (... on the surface, we'll get around to that), it's about provoking the other person.

It would be entirely understandable for Riku to be upset wither her, which would possibly stand as a threat, and she tries to confront that head on to get a reaction out of him.

She has enough awareness to know what she wants, and that she's feeling cornered, but the exact phrasing she used is interesting considering her situation:

Do you hate me for taking your friend away?

Because before she got these answers, what she already knew was that she could end up hurting Roxas. Realistically, this could be a question she'd want to ask Axel:

Will you hate me if I take our friend away.

And I do think she knows that's what she's afraid of, deep down, but she's too scared to actually ask (keeps running away). What I don't think she's aware of is that she's using Riku as a proxy, here. I think she's just trying to control the conversation.

So, with Xion we have: mixed levels of emotional awareness, but high control of her use of words.

Maybe it doesn't mean much, but I find it interesting. They all will say the most insane things under pressure, but it comes out in very different ways, with very different intent.

Kairi, who will avoid till things get too much then blurt things out involuntarily, then try to take it back.

Namine, who will try to control the narrative but can't stop keep the edge of passive-aggressiveness out.

Xion, who would rather go on the attack before you can hurt her first.

how bad is it? i just got it on my youtube recommended and i dont want to give it watch time

Going through the transcript because I'm not watching it again lmao. Typed it all out for context. Misinformation bolded in red for you to skim through.

TLDR: Youtuber Thumin obviously and obliviously describing antis but labeling them as proshippers. Unsurprisingly, she got her info from the good ol' Tiktok.

Starting at 3:24: "Let me go over what a proshipper even is."

"A proshipper is a fandom term for an individual who endorses or creates content that ships fictional characters together regardless if the ship is considered controversial or taboo. These ships can include minors in compromising situations, child x adult relationships, incest, and even glorified violence and SA. The reason why proshippers get so much backlash is their insistence on normalizing specifically child x adult relationships and sexualizing underage characters in their works while avidly defending their stance. "According to proshippers, they aren't doing anything wrong by depicting fictional children in inappropriate ways because no real child was harmed when creating said works. They are adamant that the problematic works they create or consume are completely harmless because it's fictional and those who criticize said works are stupid and in the wrong. This is my biggest issue with proshippers specifically. It's one thing to have a controversial opinion on something and rolling with it, and another to try and shove it down others' throats or harassing and bullying others who don't agree with your opinion. Proshippers are infamous for seeking out anyone who has any criticism for works that depict children in disturbing ways and straight up harassing them over that opinion. "It happened to me a while ago too when I criticized a manga because it shipped a kindergarten teacher with a toddler and I got swarmed by angry proshippers who insist I was in the wrong for my opinon. They went on to harass me in my mentions by sharing toddler hentai for anyone to see while still mocking me for not liking such a predatory relationship. [. . .] "In these fandom streets, proshippers are infamous for being freaks and weirdos who judge anyone who doesn't approve of their bizarre interest in sexualizing fictional kids. Some go as far as calling proshippers who still continue to sexualize children even in their adulthood [pedophiles]. [. . . ] So now that we know what a proshipper is and how problematic they can be . . ."

At 6:40:

"A proshipper is literally just a term for someone who supports problematic ships . . ."

At 9:40:

"When it comes to the whole discussion of if being a proshipper is good or bad, that's up to you guys to decide for yourself. I personally dislike the ship dynamics that proshippers die on the hill for. I think it's disgusting to sexualize underage characters, incest, and non-consensual relationships. That's my opinion. I also believe that sharing art like that could hurt real children because it helps normalize depredation that is being glorified in said works. Again, this is just my opinion. If these sensitive and taboo subjects are covered in a non-glorified way in order to shed light on them or to tell a compelling story then I personally don't mind them. As a fan of horror mangas and thrillers, it's common to come across stories with disturbing relationship dynamics and that's totally okay. The issue I have with proshippers is that they defend even the most blatant works that are literally just made and meant for predators to consume. They also have to attack and force their ideals on anyone even if it means harassing them for simply disagreeing with them. This is what I've personally noticed is the case, at least online."

So my New Year's Adam was incredibly disappointing lol. I quite liked her content. And I did the proshipper thing, which was to immediately SMASH THAT SUBSCRIBE BUTTON to unfuckingsub.

There was a comment she replied to saying that she worded it like this due to her experiences with proshippers in the past. Bestie, those weren't proshippers. SALS, like live and let live, is inherently anti-harassment. Someone whose job is to put out informative videos to facilitate meaningful discussions should know not to get her info from fucking Tiktok of all places.