SO WHAT IF I IT'S "OC" TO HAVE MIGUEL ACT LIKE A DAD TO MILES?! LET ME MAKE HIM BE A DAD! LET MIGUEL WRAP UP MILES IN A BLANKET AND CUDDLE HIM WHILE HE GIVES HIM FOREHEAD KISSES!!

Do you ever think about how in School Hard Spike credits his defeat with Buffy having family and friends that came to her aid, then Spike became the one person always willing to have her back no matter how many times Giles tried to say she needed to go it alone

Her watcher repeatedly insisted she needed to stand on her own two feet but Spike, slayer of slayers, knew that was the thing that got slayers killed

look, I love Garrus but his ME1 characterization makes me wanna do this to him

did someone actually hate on your fave? or did they neutrally attribute a trait to them that you've unnecessarily negatively moralized and you hurt own feelings about it? or, perhaps, did you project too hard and now interpret even mild critique or simple acknowledgement of interesting character flaws as an ad hominem attack on yourself?

Fans who cite Luffy and Ace as some of their top characters while vocally hating on Sabo and every aspect of his arc are so embarrassing, like baby girl, your faves would actually hate you 😬

Whenever the JL starts complaining about YJs public image YJ just straight up gaslights them

Once again, I hate hate hate it when certain people that saw TOH judge Luz based ONLY on how in episode 1 she brought fireworks to school and let loose live snakes and spiders.

And just boil her down to that.

I wonder why christian misrepresentation are rarely talked about if compared to other religion misrepresentation. Like, I've seen people really vocal about Greek myths misrepresentation in LO and such (and it's valid because it's a culture and religion) but I rarely saw the same thing with christian even though there are many media who use christian religion innacurately, to the point where it comes off as using it as an aesthetic and not a proper religion.

Is it because of rampant religious trauma especially in western world? No ulterior motives on this question. I'm not a christian and yet I'm curious about this. I apologize if this sounds harsh.

I obviously don't have The Answer(tm) to this but personally speaking (and I'm about to get VERY personal here so take this with MOUNTAINS OF SALT), I think it's just the obvious - Christian mythology is one of the most well-documented and strongly protected out of virtually any other religion on the planet. Especially here in the West, it's commonplace for kids to go to Sunday school, for couples to have Christian weddings even if they're not practising Christians themselves, even the American anthem references the Christian God. It's simply not as easy to 'misrepresent' it because the representation is written into our very fabric of society. Even Greece itself is primarily made up of Orthodox Christians.

So anyone that does 'misrepresent' it are either completely mislead hardcore Christians, or people who are doing it intentionally, such as with the intent to make a parody of it or to deconstruct it through a different context or whatever have you. And of course, people will still get mad at those things, if you're implying that people aren't vocal about Christian misrepresentation then frankly IDK what to tell you there LOL If you want a contextual example in the realm of webtoons, Religiously Gay was dragged to hell and back during its launch for having a very crude and insulting depiction of St. Michael, and frankly, yeah I don't disagree because what the fuck is this-

(like at best it's just terrible character design lmao that said, there's also plenty else to criticize Religiously Gay for, including its fetishy representation of gay relationships and the fact that it's still just the "naive person who looks and acts like a child hooks up with mean person in a position of power" trope, blech, but the character design is definitely the first thing you notice)

There are even plenty of hardcore Christians who will deadass claim "misrepresentation" over things that ARE factually correct but they just haven't read the actual Bible and simply cherry pick what works for their own agenda. And of course those people are routinely called out by people like myself who know for a fact that Jesus wouldn't have promoted the war crimes that many modern day Christians are committing and justifying today. So it really depends on the definition of "misrepresentation" here.

The issue specifically with LO and Rachel that I personally call her out for (and many others) is that she's called herself a "folklorist" and claimed she's so much more knowledgeable on Greek myth than anyone else, while making a complete mockery of the original mythologies while not being honest about her intent as to whether LO is actually supposed to be a legitimate retelling OR a parody (because it sure acts like the latter more than the former, but she still seems to expect us to take it seriously and consider her knowledge of Greek myth superior?) Which leads to a lot of her teenage audience claiming shit like "Persephone went down to the underworld willingly" and "Apollo did assault Persephone in the original myths actually" and the classic "why would Lore Olympus lie or make up fake myths?"

You just can't pull off this extent of erasure with Christian mythology because we have a whole ass book of it that's been preserved, sold on shelves, and systematically integrated into society for thousands of years. Of course, there are people who will still try their damned best to twist the Bible to match their own bigotry with the whole "Jesus hates gays" bullshit (he would never), but it's met with equal amounts of 'misrepresentation' that are actually fully well-read and are intentionally subverting and changing things to either critique, parody, or restore the original intent of a lot of stories in the Bible without all the manufactured right-wing crap.

Greek myth, on the other hand, has some stories that are well preserved, and others, not so much. And in the modern day outside of the poems and hymns, you'll also rarely, if ever, see anyone use stories from Greek myth to ostracize, torture, and murder other people. "Misrepresenting Christianity" is more often done by actual Christians who are using the Bible to commit hate crimes than the people who have actually read the Bible and are just taking creative liberties with it for the sake of deconstructing / parodying / analyzing / subverting it. Veggie Tales "misrepresents" Christian stories because obviously Moses wasn't a fucking cucumber lmao but it still accomplishes its goal by retelling Christian stories in a way that's fun and educational for children.

By comparison (on the whole, I'm not comparing LO to Veggie Tales LMAO) LO just isn't clear in its intentions beyond Rachel's initial statements that she was trying to "deconstruct" the myths, while labelling herself as a folklorist. Therefore, I'm going to criticize how she does it because the way she's done it up until now has been very mishandled and has resulted in a lot of misinterpretations of the myths simply for the sake of fandom. And yes, these people exist in Christian media as well - they're called TV evangelists.

And that's my (very heavy) two cents.

The criticism that I've seen that Gwiles/Ghostflower receives that they "are only so connected bc they're both spiders" is silly cuz idk how to break it to ya but that's the whole point.

The point of the first movie and the reason why Spider Gang got so attached to each other so quickly is cuz they thought they were going through all of their struggles alone until they've met. They repeat this several times in the movie.

Because what they're doing is hard and they feel like no one understands them, not really, because no one in their universes has the same powers and backstories, until they found out that there are others who went through basically the same things they were going through. And it is what brought the whole team closer, and Miles and Gwen as love interests. It's not that they're only attracted to each other because of that - Miles and Gwen even started getting along before they knew about each other's powers - but that was exactly what made them (I'm talking about the whole team now as well as M and G as a potential couple) so considerate of each other from the start.

That's the plot (or one of many plots) of the movie.

RIP to those who made the fatal mistake of crossing paths with Viktor and Mordecai's situationship

Sniffles

Poor Shmuck

The only pet dog in the Lackadaisy universe

Honorable mentions

Assorted goons

Defiance General Store owners skull integrity

Who's your favorite philosopher of the enlightenment? Locke? Voltaire? Rousseau? WRONG.

Diderot is the greatest philosopher of the enlightenment because he was the only one who did shit.

Voltaire was all bark no bite, Locke had his head so far up his optimistic ass that he couldn't have implemented any of his ideas if he tried, and Rousseau was Rousseau.

All of the enlightened philosophers believed in and advocated for equal education yet Diderot was the only person to actually provide it.

With his Encyclopedia he managed to distribute knowledge regardless of social class. It started out only for the rich but with modified versions, thinner paper and less pictures, he was able to make it cheaper and available to all. It became a household item that could teach people anything they needed to know.

Was it free schooling? No. But, as a commoner, it was both the most he could do and the biggest step towards indiscrimant education that any philosopher had ever taken.

Diderot is THE best philosopher of the enlightenment, period.

Angel's allowed to be comfortable in his own body. He's portrayed in a sexy way because that's how he presents himself and wants to without Valentino breathing down his neck.

How could anyone take this seriously. Participated in the porn industry but he's not proud of it despite his ENTIRE personality and eccentric drag lifestyle? Dislikes water and space and has the personality as 'Bitch'. Yeah no why are you defending this as good drag?

He is nothing without the performing name we don't even know how he died nor his human name as if that matters. The show is labeled as redemption and healing over abuse but it blatantly animates abuse without the substance of realizing that 'Hey wait a minute were portraying actual drug abuse and pimp abuse as fetish bait maybe we should rewrite angel as an actual person!'

Your characters name is slang for cocaine and his entire shtick is based around being abused. There is no point to AD other then the fact that he serves eye candy to service the fact that feminine men have to overtly ALWAYS be portrayed in media as sexual. That's a bad thing if you didn't catch my drift. Drag Queens come in different sizes shapes lives loves losses gives hopes and fears, angel dust gives none of that whatsoever.

Go to your local gay bar and have a drink dude

You know what's interesting to me? For all people keep claiming at every juncture that perhaps Bells Hells will come around on the gods and see the harm they do (which, as discussed extensively, is, half the time, simply not intervening) not only have they never done so, but also they never quite cross the line into saying the party should join the Ruby Vanguard or aid them - and indeed, they defend against it - so what does this achieve? It feels like they're asking for a story in which the party stands idly by, which isn't much of a story nor, if I may connect this briefly to the real world, a political stance anyone should be proud of.

That's honestly the frustration with the gods and the "what if the Vanguard has a point" conversations in-game. What do we do then? Do we allow the organization that will murder anyone for pretty much any reason that loosely ties into their goals run rampant? The group that (perhaps unwittingly, but then again, Otohan's blades had that poison) disrupted magic world-wide, and caused people who had the misfortune to live at nexus points to be teleported (most, as commoners, without means of return). While also fomenting worldwide unrest?

Those were the arguments before the trip to Ruidus; with the reveal of the Vanguard's goals to invade Exandria, the situation becomes even more dire. Do you let the Imperium take over the planet?

And do the arguments against the gods even hold up? If Ludinus is so angry at them for the Calamity, what does it say that he destroyed Western Wildemount's first post-Calamity society for entirely selfish means? (What does it say about the validity of vengeance as a motivator?) What does it say that Laudna told Imogen she could always just live in a cottage quietly without issue before the solstice even happened? (Would this still be true if the Imperium controls the world?) What does it say that when faced with a furious, grieving party and the daughter she keeps telling herself was her reason for all of this, Liliana can't provide an answer to the question of what the gods have done other than that their followers will retaliate...for, you know, the Vanguard's endless list of murders. (That is how the Vanguard and Imperium tend to think, huh? "How dare your face get in the way of my boot; how dare you hit me back when I strike you.") She can't even provide a positive answer - why is Predathos better - other than "I feel it", even though Imogen and Fearne know firsthand that Predathos can provide artificial feelings of elation. Given all the harm Ludinus has done in pursuit, why isn't the conclusion "the gods should have crashed Aeor in such a way that the tech was unrecoverable?"

Even as early as the first real discussion on what the party should do, the fandom always stopped short of saying "no, Imogen's right, they should join up with the people who killed half the party," it was always "no, she didn't really mean it, she just was trying to connect with her mother." Well, she's connected with her mother, and at this point the party doesn't even care about the gods particularly (their only divinely-connected party member having died to prevent the Vanguard from killing all of them). So they will stop the Vanguard; as Ashton says, the means are unforgiveable. As Laudna says, it's not safe to bet on Predathos's apathy. As Imogen says, she's done running; the voice that she used to think of as a lifeline belongs to someone she doesn't trust. So I guess my question is: if they're stopping the people who are trying to kill the gods (and defense of the gods isn't remotely their personal motivation)...do you think the next phase of the campaign is Bells Hells personally killing the gods? Reconstructing the Aeor tech and hoping none of their allies notice? How does this end? Does your ideology ever get enacted? Or is this entirely moot and pointless and the story ends with Bells Hells saying "well, I'm really glad we stopped the people who [insert list of Vanguard atrocities from above]; none of us follow the gods or plan to, but honestly, the status quo we return to is preferable to whatever nightmare Ludinus had concocted in his violent quest for power and revenge"?

I think some people need the reminder that you can just not like things. For whatever reason. You don't need to justify things you don't like to anyone, as long as you're not making people feel bad for liking it.

You're able to not like something, but that doesn't make it weird.

You're able to not like that people like something, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're bad people (within reason of course)

And it's also important to remember that you may like something that other people don't like. That doesn't mean they have a personal vendatta against you for liking it.

That doesn't mean you're wrong, nor are they wrong.

People have preferences for everything. Just because you prefer something, that doesn't mean you're "right". This is fandom, there are very few things that even have a "right" and "wrong" side.

Sometimes I feel like I'm the most chill person in this fandom when it comes to ships and characters. Like I can find reasons as to why each ship would work and wouldn't.

Pandalily? Academic rivals FOR SURE.

Jegulus? HELLO??? Bestfriends brother? Grumpy x Sunshine?

Partyvan? Peter deserves ALL that love.

Marylene? Not friends, not lovers, but something. It's so heartbreakingly cute.

I can even find stuff for ships I don't even ship.

Jeverus? After he saves his life? Hell yeah!

Dramoine? ENEMIES TO LOVERS! REDEMPTION ARCS!

Prongsfoot? Best friends to lover? Sure, man, go for it!

Regulus x Sirius?.......... You... You do you bro???

Snily? That "always" line was cute, I gotta admit.

I genuinely won't judge like if you ship them - if you see them working out; GO. FOR. IT. THEYRE FICTIONAL!! Have your own opinions, it's okay!

AND THE CHARACTERS!!!

Yes, they all have their flaws. Yes, James bullied Severus. Yes, James repeatedly asked Lily even though she'd already turned her down. Yes, he changed!!

Yes, Severus called the love of his life a slur. Yes, he bullied children. Yes he cared for Harry to some extent! Even if it's only as a tribute to Lily, that's better than nothing.

Yes, Dumblewh*re raise Harry for slaughter.... That's it... I have nothing more to add for him.... Bitch.

Yes, Regulus is a death eater. Yes, Regulus was obsessed with the dark lord since childhood. Yes, he stole the horcrux!!

Sorry for the rant but like I'm seeing so much hate for so many characters and ships and I don't understand it. There's as much to love as there is to hate. It wouldn't be fair if they were perfect flawless characters. They're designed to be insufferable and loving and idiotic and a little crazy.

Nah man, claiming that Hades 2 has terrible character designs is an objectively terrible take.