The Kraken vs a typical pirate approach to violence

To all the people saying that the Kraken is only a defense mechanism and Ed would never do anything violent if he was not a poor, heartbroken baby.

I get the sentiment and YES, the Kraken is a defense mechanism coming from his traumatic experiences, BUT let me show you something else as well:

Ed is a pirate, and pirates - despite usually avoiding unnecessary violence to avoid injuries and the risk of damaging the ship - weren't really the most pleasant guys around.

He literally told Fang to skin a man alive with a snail fork (ep5)

"a bit more oomph"? (ep5) I get that scaring people is not the same as killing, but it is still a form of violence that was a kinda casual thing for him.

Canonically, he did set a ship on fire with its crew still inside. (we don't know the reasons, however)

What would be considered unnecessary violence now, did not have to feel unnecessary back then, especially on the open sea when someone getting killed during pillage wasn't really that unusual.

He fully endorsed his crew doing all the stuff they did to the Spanish (ep3) and on the merchant ship (ep5), even knowing that its crew was basically unarmed.

Probably more but I'm not gonna list it as I'm at work now lol

I get it, I love a complex, angsty character just like everyone else, but let's not act like every single violent action from Ed is the Kraken taking over. The dude's a fucking PIRATE and some level of violence was simply what you did. Yeah, pirates injured people, made them walk the plank, keelhauled their crew members, and much more, so let's not act like Ed was an angel that was misunderstood and would never hurt a fly.

Going over the izzy/lucius/shark exchange is so interesting in the context of this being an episode about apologies. About making concessions and trying to fix things.

(In this ep there's a lot about ed making amends/accommodating the crew's triggers and trauma. It's also about stede having to fix things when he upsets the superstitious crew by not treating their feelings as valid.)

At the start we have Ed's (probably well intentioned) but evasive, non-apology. He does an 'I'm sorry you feel that way' sort of apology about 'whatever that bad stuff was'. It's a wish to do better, but it doesn't really cover what went before. A lot of people interject here, but Izzy remains completely still and silent, off to one side.

Lucius says he never used the word 'sorry' and rightly calls this out. Roach however, says he's never heard an apology before - and liked it - so this seems like as much as it's a first for Ed to take even some accountability, it's probably the first time some of the crew have seen a captain (or anyone else) do this too.

Archie says 'They just get away with it and we move on'.

Lucius rounds on Izzy, because obviously Izzy should have the biggest grievance here. But Izzy responds to the question about Ed's apology as if it was about piracy in general - clearly showing that the cycle of abuse is a feature, not a bug. This is part of his life and identity as a pirate. This is, actually, things going back to normal. You get whipped (and we see these scars on him later) no one apologises, and you just reset to how it was before, pretending nothing has been altered until it all bubbles over again.

Ed then tells stede that he's never apologised for anything. Confirming that most of the crew's responses are in line with their past experiences.

Then Ed goes to fix the door and tells it that it's not its fault that it's broken, it was just doing it's job. This directly parallels Izzy's rant to the figurehead about it failing to do it's job. Ed could be talking about himself here, as Izzy was talking about himself - but to me it doesn't fit that well, because what 'job' was Ed trying to do? He could instead be acknowledging, indirectly, that he is aware that Izzy was doing his job - trying to make sure they all survived and functioned as a crew. Ed probably broke that door, and he broke Izzy. But he has yet to talk to him about it.

Immediately following this, is when he scares the BEJESUS out of Lucius and tells him 'it would be faster to get all this out in one go'. It sounds like a reasonable suggestion, but we know that it doesn't actually work. Lucius pushes him off the boat and it doesn't help. Because 'I hurt you, so now you hurt me' doesn't benefit the abused, it's still about making the abuser feel better - making them feel punished and therefore redeemed, even when their victim isn't healed. I don't think Ed is trying to manipulate Lucius here - both of them think it might help to 'fix things' but fixing things takes emotional intelligence that's not really developed yet.

ENTER, THE SHARK

Izzy starts working on the shark, after the non-apology. He doesn't have it in the 'candle fighting' scene obvs - but he does receive an apology in that scene, when stede says 'feet' and then corrects himself to foot. It's a simple straightforward apology, even if he does sort of laugh awkwardly. Izzy also at least attempted to apologise to Stede in ep. 3 - so he clearly sees the use in apologies - AND right after the apology, Izzy agrees to help stede. Their relationship changes. It gets better and they're no longer stuck in those old patterns. Izzy is full-on gentle parenting stede - even when he shoots down a fucking sail.

He also, notably, states that the crew's feelings on the curse are important. Meaning, how the crew feels is important to him, period.

After this, we're back to Lucius throwing Ed overboard. But it doesn't work because Ed doesn't remember the talent show thing, he doesn't really know why Lucius was so blindsided by that betrayal of trust. It's not about who goes overboard. It's about the dynamics underneath that and those can't be fixed by just trading places for a moment.

FINALLY. We see Izzy finishing the shark, and he's completely unsurprised that Lucius pushing Ed into the water didn't fix things. Izzy's done this 'tit for tat' thing - betraying Ed to the English over being banished - and it ended terribly for both of them. It escalated things. He knows it's not as simply as getting even with someone.

The solution Izzy has chosen to the cycle of his relationship with Ed is to pretend that Ed hasn't done anything to him. A shark did it. Like with the non-apology, blame is being shifted to a third party 'the bad things' the 'bad times'. Lucius (rightly) points out that this is not healthy, but Izzy's response, that's better than not moving on, clearly resonates.

Izzy's response to being hurt was to 1. Get even and 2. (when that proved deeply unsatisfying and made things worse) to put the unresolved conflict behind him. Because he doesn't think Ed is ever going to apologise or change, and wanting those things just hurt more.

Anyone who has parents/a partner/friend who's NEVER apologised for anything, knows how he's feeling. You stop trying to have it out and fix the relationship, and it starts to wither, even though the other person thinks it's healthy.

'Not moving on is worse' is a warning, and it's one that Lucius takes to heart, immediately trying to centre positive things instead of resentment and anger. He shares his feelings with Pete, and their relationship thrives.

The issue here, is that denial doesn't work. Lucius might be able to move on from what happened to him without a proper apology from Ed, but that's because he's not in a relationship with him. Izzy's the one who's really in it with Ed - he's had DECADES of this shit. That can't be willed away.

Stede's resolution to the curse conflict models a healthier method and one that I'm hoping we see in a future episode between Ed/Izzy. He validates the crew's feelings, make a sacrifice (the suit) and TOGETHER they collaborate on a solution to the issue that is mutually satisfactory - he even gets to keep the shirt, as a sort of compromise. It isn't about just making stede or the crew feel better, it's about moving on together.

This happens with Ed and Fang! Ed actually apologises once he realises what, specifically he did wrong. Fang says they're 'sweet' because he beat Ed to death (oof) which outwardly seems like retaliation working - but there has also been an actual apology and Fang wasn't retaliating against Ed, he was standing up for himself - a physical version of saying 'that wasn't OK - you need to change'.

This method of resolution is echoed in the final scene, with stede and ed. They reach an understanding about the pace of their relationship and find a happy medium (holding hands) - mutually satisfied and moving forwards.

Bottom line? I hope we see 1. Ed actually apologise to Izzy and 2. the pair of them outline what it is they want to change in their relationship moving forward, ending the cycle for good.

Thank you for coming to my Ed talk.

Stede sees that Ed's automatic reaction to upsetting situations is to hide under a blanket - that that's where he goes to try and feel safe when he's feeling vulnerable - and slowly but surely begins to amass a collection of different blankets in their bedroom. Different sizes, different weights, different colours, different thicknesses, different fabrics, different textures - all folded neatly under their bed, to make sure Ed has exactly what he needs to feel safe on any given day and in response to any given situation/emotion.

He also notes that Ed likes the pressure of being cuddled whilst wrapped in the blanket, that that makes him feel especially safe and secure, but it becomes tricky on those days when Ed just wants to be left alone (especially if the upset in question is some sort of argument between them). So, Stede writes to Wee John, and they put their heads together to find a solution, and that's how they invent ye olde weighted blanket.

ed then proceeds to immediately fall and fuck up his knee

ofmd as posts i saved to my phone way before ofmd came out

part 6/?

Everyday I'm so sad knowing not many people share my headcanon that Starlo and Ed are exes.

Tempted to be the person to make this a thing.

izzy is a rules-routines-patterns autist and stede is a norms-are-nonsense autist, and that's why they don't get along

there is the same guilt and the same "i ruined who you are and i am not worth that you go to such extremes for someone like me" sentiment when stede mentions ed shaving his beard, as a symbol of him losing his freedom to serve the king, and when ed feels the need to leave after stede kills ned, even if that also comes from his own need to find out who he is and who he wants to be

Transmascs on The Revenge ranked from worst to best strap game

Edward Teach- worst strap game ever. Utter pillow princess.

Izzy Hands- Terrible strap game, it would be mid if he had more experience but fortunately for all of us and unfortunately for him he is not getting laid.

Jim Jimenez- Incredible strap game for someone who was raised by nuns to become a killing machine, which is to say really good strap game could be better if it weren’t for that damn religious trauma

Black Pete- god teir strap game. Lays the best pipe.

actually yk what I'm gonna say this out loud.

I am sick and tired of people acting like Ed not allowing Fang to bring his shitty dog on board is some great injustice that he will have to beg forgiveness for.

"No pets" is a perfectly reasonable rule. They live on a ship. There's limited space and resources. Who in their right mind would think it a good idea to bring a dog on a pirate ship. How would you even feed it! They haven't invented dog food yet! There often was barely enough food for the humans, sailors were chronically malnourished (famously so! It's even a plot point in the show!), and you want to bring a dog?? What's it supposed to do on board other than just piss and shit everywhere and then slowly starve to death?

Speaking of which. Ed immediately gives the reason for not allowing pets on board - "They befoul the ship"! Which they do! And there's no way around it. Other animals at least are somewhat useful - livestock for fresh food products, cats for pest control (so they feed themselves and also they can easily be trained to shit in a box). But dogs? What use would a dog be on board.

The "the love of a pet makes a man weak" is obviously bullshit. Ed doesn't even remember saying it. It's the sort of excuse you come up with when your reasonable arguments aren't listened to. Ed clearly doesn't truly believe that.

Then Fang being "forced" to put his dog down. First of all, there's no indication Fang was forced to join Ed's crew - if his dog had been that important to him, he simply could not have become a pirate! He doesn't say "When you made me join your crew", it's "When I joined your crew", implying this was 100% voluntary. First of all. Second of all, you realize they didn't have animal shelters back then right? Would it really have been more kind to abandon that dog to a slow death in the streets? No. He's gotta take responsibility, and that means facing that this animal's life is in his hands. If he can't care for it anymore, and there's no other option, the least he could do is give it a clean death himself.

And lastly. The whole reason this is even brought up is because Izzy is a petty little bitch who hates friendship. Like. We realize Izzy is an unreliable narrator but not when it comes to this?? Not when he's clearly just looking for an excuse to dehumanize Stede? Okay lol.

Ed is perfectly within his rights to not want dogs on his ship and has very good reasons for that.

I could be charitable to David and say that he misspoke when he said that Izzy was a father figure to Ed. It's possible that he meant that Izzy reminds Ed of his father, and he was comfortable with Izzy because he was used to such a toxic relationship, but i'm not quite sure even that is right. Even if it was the case, being a reminder of his father is still very different from saying that Izzy was a "father figure" to Ed. We all know what a father figure entails, its usually a phrase used to describe someone you respect, who's opinion you value, that teaches you lessons, and skills, and even someone that can be there for your emotional needs, now that's not to say that Izzy doesn't fit into any of these categories, I definitely think that Izzy tries to be there for Ed in his own way, and he tries to guide him, but the key word there is tries, more often than not Ed disregards Izzy's opinion, his advice, his worries, and his attempts at soothing Ed's moods have absolutely no affect on Ed. So how is it exactly, that Ed views him as a father figure when he isn't interacting with him in the manner you'd expect a son to engage with his father? I say its possible that if Izzy has to represent anyone, it might be Ed's mother, but in that same vein, Ed would represent his father. Izzy and Ed fight and injure each other like his mom and dad did, and yet they stayed together, like his mom and dad did, they have that same toxic codependency, and their communication skills are about as good as his mom and dads ever were. Its more like their dynamic was mirroring his mom and dad's toxic and abusive relationship, he was raised to think that this is what love looked like, and he was following in their footsteps, Izzy isn't his father figure at all, if anything, Ed is his own father, and with Izzy as his mother its as if they were playing mommy and daddy together... If you've ever heard the phrase "oh god, I've married my mother/father" you know that this is a common enough occurrence, its not a weird incesty thing, rather its just a matter of growing up around a certain type of love and accidentally emulating it when you grow older, its a cycle that is often repeated, and is hard to break. All of this wasn't some attempt to say that i think Ed had romantic or sexual feelings in return for Izzy, more than likely that's not the case, but they definitely were in a marriage of sorts, it's just a shame that both of them probably grew up with fucked up ideas on what it means to love someone, so a lot of their partnership ended up being unstable. So yeah, i veto "father figure" entirely, and posit "wife" instead.

I have a concept for a OFMD fic that I want to write but I need to enthuse about it here bc its making me laugh so much and no one else understands me.

So some kinda modern au where they all end up at a karaoke bar and for some reason my batshit brain decided that Izzy would sing this (don't fucking ask me why, I actually don't even know)

And Frenchie and Wee John would be there with backing vocals and spashing water around at the key changes all dramatic like - buttons would be there with a fan and a smoke machine and there would be lasers and Ed would be poo pooing it bc he can do Celine better (ofc) and Stede would be crying bc who wouldn't and the swede would look aghast bc his phantom of the opera has been massively surpassed - Jim would be puking in a bucket or smth i dunno

And he'd be singing it to Lucius or someone (no actually yes just Lucius) because I'm a raging sprizzy shipper okay and it would be just *chefs kiss* and and and

Okay. Breathe.

Back to it!

MEG TELL ME ABOUT THIS ONE One pretty dude thinks he's not that pretty. Another pretty dude fucks him about it

OKAY LISTEN JON, WE ALL SAW THAT VIDEO WHERE NICK SAID HE COULDN'T HAVE PIZZA BECAUSE HE HAS TO LOSE WEIGHT AND IT'S THE MOST GOD DAMN RIDICULOUS THING I'VE EVER SEEN BECAUSE HE'S FUCKING PERFECT.

Anyway, Taylor thinks so too, and because Taylor has A WHOLE FUCKING LIST OF THINGS HE THINKS ARE PERFECT ABOUT NICK, WELL HE'S GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF FUCKING TIME SHOWING HIM, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN 😏😏😏😏

Good morning Ella :))

How many new tummy peeks do you think we'll get in S2? 😇

i’m expecting several tummy sightings as well as full naked chest appearances because once ed sees stede in that slutty shirt with the ridiculous neckline, ed will have a hard time staying fully clothed

so i know ed and stede's love languages have been discussed to death but i'm gonna do it too because imo many cakes isn't just about fic.

specifically, i want to talk about what i think their love languages are, and why they are what they are, and also why this supports the fact that stede and ed are more alike than they seem at face value.

but in order to do that, we'll also need to talk about violence.

so there's pretty much no question that ed's love language is physical touch. his first real contact with stede (y'know, besides when he was like 3/4 dead and barely conscious and looking like a drowned rat) was a gentle touch to the hand.

he's constantly giving stede little reassuring touches, and just casual ones as well.

stede, on the other hand– i've seen people suggest that his love language is quality time based on the treasure hunt episode, but i disagree with this. he did that with the specific goal of impressing ed with an adventure, not just spending time with him.

no, i firmly believe that stede's love language is words of affirmation. he's always praising not only ed but also the crew with verbal reassurances.

i mean, his main motto as a captain is "we talk it through as a crew." it's hard to be more clearly in favor of verbal support than that.

(this is mostly split for Very Long length but also consider this your content warning for discussion of stede and ed's childhood abuse a bit further down.)

we see both of these love languages at play from the moment they meet. in their very first conversation, when stede is feeling unsure of himself, ed gives him reassurance and– importantly– a few gentle touches, and stede responds with praise.

and once they get to know each other better, they also start communicating in each other's love languages to show support and care.

so, we know their love languages. but why are these their love languages?

well, i'm far from the first to say it, but i think it's because of this.

they use what they know.

when you've grown up in a culture of physical violence, bodily contact is what you learn how to utilize.

and obviously being immersed in violence extends well beyond ed's childhood– it's present through his whole career in piracy– but that was where it took root.

and, likewise, if you've been raised in a world where violence is committed through words and not punches, then language is your most trusted weapon.

and the same goes for this being a factor throughout all of stede's life, and from far more people than just his father.

but... stede doesn't use his words for violence. not usually, at least, and never with people he loves. he's passive aggressive with izzy, with the french aristocrats, and a bit with mary after he catches her with doug. but for the most part, he uses his words to show care and appreciation to his crew and to ed.

just like how we rarely see ed use actual physical violence. he certainly delegates it, but the most we see him commit by his own hand (in real time, not counting killing his father) is threaten a racist french captain, horse around with calico jack (who was raised in the same culture of violence as ed, i might add), and then what he does to lucius and izzy after he gives up hope of stede returning. like stede, we mostly see him use physical touch as a gesture of care and fondness.

they may have different love languages, but their love languages arise from the same source: the methods they were taught to harm people. one of the many things stede and ed have in common is that they both show the most support using the tools that they were always told can do the most damage. they've both reclaimed the languages of violence they grew up with-

-to use them for love.

jack skellington has ehlers danlos