this is only the beginning of a long history of this sort of behavior

anonymous asked:

From the progress of the manga, we can see that Todoroki and Bakugou have to spend more time together to get their provisional hero license but don't you think it's odd that Todoroki never points out the similarity between Bakugou and Endeavor in terms of their abuse? I thought Todoroki would at least disapprove of Bakugou with his bullying.

the thing is, the audience sees more than the characters ever do. 

Todoroki doesn’t actually know the full extent of Bakugou’s bullying. only the audience, Bakugou, and Izuku do. Todoroki has no clue that this has gone on for 10 years, and the most he really knows is that they used to be good friends when they were kids, and had some sort of falling out, and now Bakugou hates Izuku. 

Todoroki doesn’t know that it’s gone on for ten years, nor does he understand how bad it was. 

since coming to UA, Bakugou and Izuku’s relationship is nothing like it was during the years prior. Bakugou is still hostile towards Izuku, but the teachers actively discourage that kind of behavior, so it hasn’t been shown as often. and by the time they get to the dorms, well, Bakugou’s been all caught up in the guilt and shame he felt for causing All Might’s retirement, and generally kept away from Izuku. after their fight, their issues are… not quite resolved, but they managed to talk it out for the first time, and are much more calm and relaxed around each other. so again, there’s no reason for Todoroki to really suspect something, since they’re on much better terms now.

maybe if he paid attention earlier on, during the first exam to the Sports Festival, he might have noticed. but Todoroki was caught up in his own personal issues with Endeavor. he hardly noticed anyone else around him, and only focused on his own problems. which eventually lead to him failing the Provisional License exam, because of the issues this attitude caused in the past began to catch up with him.

even during the first exam, all Todoroki seemed to pay attention to was pointing out that Bakugou had amazing technique in his fight against Izuku, and that he was smarter than he seemed. he never mentioned the very obvious personal grudges fueling the fight at all.

up until the Sports Festival, Todoroki had no reason to pay attention to the people around him. he had no reason to notice Bakugou’s attitude towards Izuku, and had no reason to suspect that it was actually much worse than it seemed.

Todoroki is still learning about Bakugou. he feels regret for giving him a false win at the Sports Festival. he feels responsible for Bakugou getting kidnapped at the training camp. he actually does respect and like Bakugou on a level, and sees him as an equal. the relationship Todoroki has with Bakugou is nothing like his relationship with Endeavor, and nothing that he’s seen so far would lead Todoroki to make a connection between Bakugou and Endeavor’s behavior.

also, yes. both characters abused Izuku and Todoroki, respectively. however, their attitudes were completely different. Bakugou resented and feared Izuku because he was scared Izuku was looking down on him, and could maybe one day surpass him, which did nothing but fuel his inferiority complex. Endeavor hurt and abused Todoroki because he felt like he was doing something amazing, he was creating a masterpiece that could finally defeat All Might, something he’s been obsessing over for 20 years. he was full of pride, because Todoroki was his greatest achievement, and never seemed to realize that what he was doing was wrong. 

they both did horrible things, but their reasons and they way they went about it were different, and again, there’s not much reason for Todoroki to make a clear cut correlation between the two character’s behavior since it doesn’t match up to his own personal experiences. 

Endeavor has never once actually shown that he thinks that he did something wrong (even if he is beginning to acknowledge it to himself). Bakugou’s attitude, however, is slowly changing and he’s becoming a little bit nicer and is no longer actively hostile towards Izuku. there’s no reason for Todoroki to make a connection, because Endeavor is still pretty awful, while Bakugou has been making leaps and bounds in character development by the time Todoroki really started to pay attention to his behavior. 

i’m sure Todoroki would disapprove of everything Bakugou did. i just wanna make that clear. Izuku did nothing to deserve that sort of behavior from Bakugou, and it seriously fucked him up, even if they are on better terms now. but there’s just no point in the series where Todoroki would ever actually see the full extent of what happened, nor be truly aware that it was actually that bad. 

the audience almost always knows more than the characters, and this is an example of that. due to his focus on his own problems, Bakugou’s development, and the fact that the full extent of Izuku and Bakugou’s bad relationship was never shown at UA thanks to the better environment, Todoroki just wouldn’t have noticed.

related meta:

I quit writing Homestuck meta a long time ago, but I guess the pre-4/13 fervor is infectious, because this popped into my head and wouldn’t go away. So here’s some musings on Homestuck, the ending, and its portrayal (or rather, erasure) of character identity and agency.  

Let’s rewind back several years and a few subsubacts, to the meteor and battleship crews’ not so triumphant arrival in the combined session. Two of the kids’ number have been mind-controlled and forced to work for the Empress. Two have been thrown in prison. One has been banished to the outer reaches of space. The rest have been divvied up and placed on various Lands, given different tasks to be completed for the Empress. Even in beating SBURB and winning the game they have no escape, because she intends to rule the new universe they create… until it spawns Lord English and is destroyed.

Things look bleak. And things look even bleaker when Game Over rolls around, and most of the cast gets exterminated. But wait! John Egbert, Heir of Breath and leader of the Beta session, has gotten his hands on a miraculous artifact supposedly useful as a weapon against Lord English. He now has the ability to travel throughout time and space and to change things that usually cannot be changed. While his friends get wiped out, he fights the “tyrannous author” figure who has been telling their story wrong and wins. Surely with his newfound abilities, he will set things right and lead them to freedom.

Except.  Not really.

Oh sure, John “saves the day”. He uses his retcon abilities to create a new timeline where everyone lives and wins the game. But is it a victory? And did everyone really live?

I’m going to argue that the ending of Homestuck is a tragedy where characters’ identities are frequently ignored or overwritten in order to serve the utilitarian aims of the narrative (and Skaia). I do not make this argument believing Hussie intended it. I think the dip in quality and coherency at the end of Homestuck was the product of an author who was tired of his project, had lost track of a bunch of plot points and characters, and just wanted to be finished. But I do think its treatment of identity is drastically different from the rest of the work and sends some disturbing messages about how “happy” that ending really is.

Keep reading

Jefferson/Reader - Part 3

It’s finally ready. I’m so sorry for the long wait. Like I said I had a really hard time with this one for some reason. Thanks so much for your patience. 

@musicalmoriarty @imaginebeinghamiltrash @daveedish @diggs4life @daveeddiggsit @butlinislin @imagineham @insane-hamilton-imagines @crazypurplebananas @hamfan22 @secretschuylersister @sunriseovertheroomwhereithappens @ourforgottenboleros @imagine-the-fluff @fanfrickinhamiltasticimagines @notthrowingawaymyfood

Part One Part Two

Word Count: 6121

When your alarm went off the next morning you felt like you hadn’t slept at all. Your talk with Lafayette had done nothing except make you more frustrated. You had tossed and turned and didn’t quite remember falling asleep in the first place. A yawn and a good stretch later you wandered your way into the kitchen to rummage for a spoon and bowl. It seemed like a fruit loops kind of morning and as you ate you once again started thinking about what you had heard Laf say before you walked out the door.

Ils sont tous deux si obstinés qu'ils ne verront jamais qu'ils sont vraiment pareils.

As you drain the last of the milk from the bowl and put it in the sink you scoff at the thought. It was already creeping close to your first class of the day and you were still in your pajamas.

“Where does he get off saying that? I mean yes I’m stubborn, but Jefferson and I being alike? Please that’s total bullshit,” you say to your own reflection in your bathroom mirror as you brush your teeth.

You dressed quickly and as you shut the door your only thought was that you were going to prove Lafayette was wrong.

Keep reading

Guaranteed Obedience, Learned Helplessness & the Power of Aversive Motivators

Practically all of horsblr should know my stance on the fear based training techniques promoted by Clinton Anderson by now.  I try to dedicate at least some time each week to answering questions related to ethical training practices and methods of training.  I try to make it a mission of mine to give the average horse enthusiast at least some sort “learning theory” education in the hopes of slowly helping people make a transition from purely traditional training to a style based more on rewards, even if its just a little bit at a time.  I too am still learning and growing.

I usually try to be decently optimistic about the current trends in the industry.   Clicker training is a growing phenomenon, big name clinicians have expressed interest in the clicker, and many folks are discussing the 4 quadrants and their place in the training regime.  Clicker training is taking social media by storm and I’ve seen more of the “big” instagram accounts begin to openly advertise their clicker based methods or clicker trained behaviors, thereby lessening the stigma against the practice…

Keep reading


Starfleet’s moral relativism problem: is it ever ok to condemn another culture?

Central to all of Star Trek has always been the Prime Directive – that set of rules that governs our intrepid space explorers from Captain Kirk to Captain Janeway and everyone in between. Poor Captain Archer existed in a time before, and I’ve often pitied him for having to shoulder the burden of having to make some really questionable ethical decisions without having a Prime Directive to shift the blame to when it turned out his decisions really sucked.

At its core, the Prime Directive dictates that Starfleet cannot interfere with the internal affairs or development of alien civilizations. Some of the best Star Trek episodes involved our heroes clashing with the ethics of a rigid application of this doctrine, but there was always one implication of the Prime Directive that bothered me – the idea that we shouldn’t judge other cultures through the lens of our own because who’s to say what’s right and what’s wrong?

This philosophy of moral relativism argues that there are no universal moral standards – sentient beings are completely at the mercy of their own societies to impart a code of moral behavior and whatever it comes up with is “good enough.” There may be common themes among many societies in terms of morals – most seem to agree it is wrong to commit murder, for instance – but ultimately, what is “right” according one society is not guaranteed to be “right” for another. And let’s be honest with ourselves – even with the topic of murder, we still fiercely debate exceptions to the “no murder” rule such as war, capital punishment, or self-defense.

Our own society provides an incredible patchwork of thorny moral and ethical issues that we still have yet to decide upon. We debate things like abortion, torture, slavery, free speech, and more. We probe these issues by asking ourselves questions like, “At what point does life truly begin?” and “Is torture ever justified?” We explore them by posing philosophical experiments like the Trolley Problem and asking ourselves whether it is morally acceptable to kill one person to save the lives of two or more others. 

How does that line go again? Something about “needs of the many” or something? 

But at the end of the day, might (in terms of numbers) makes right in moral relativism. While I don’t subscribe to that theory, there are times when our beloved Star Trek characters do under the guise of defending the Prime Directive. On the surface, it sounds very peaceful and anti-colonialist. After centuries of watching many empires from the Romans to the British set fire to cultural diversity – and given arguments that many Western nations continue to do this today, just without being quite as invadey – this sounds like a nice change of pace. Live and let live. But this also creates a mind-boggling acceptance of suffering, genocide, exploitation, and oppression within Starfleet.

One of the first chronological examples of the faults of moral relativism is found in the Star Trek: Enterprise episode, “Cogenitor.” Archer and his crew meet an affable, three-gendered species called the Vissians, but we quickly learn that only two of the society’s genders have any real rights. The third gender is referred to as a “cogenitor,” and Trip Tucker ends up on Captain Archer’s shit list for teaching it how to read and putting ideas in its head. When the cogenitor later begs for asylum, Archer refuses. It gets worse – the cogenitor is sent back to the people who basically treat it as chattel and commits suicide, and Archer points out that Tucker’s interference led to its death and will mean the Vissian couple will probably never get to have a child. No winners in this ethical dilemma of an episode, only losers. Until you remember none of this would have happened in the first place if the Vissians had just treated the cogenitors like people.

In the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode, “Angel One,” we encounter the cringe worthy society of Angel I, a planet of misandric women who oppress men. We all got a few giggles at the ladies of Enterprise-D being suddenly held in higher regard than their male counterparts, but things get very dark when Beata, the Elected One of Angel I, decides some dudes need to die for spreading heretical teachings that imply men are equal to women. We get a sort of cop out solution in which Beata has a change of heart and decides to banish rather than execute these “heretics” after Riker makes an impassioned speech about basic rights, but Riker was more than willing to let things go bad if need be, because, “The Prime Directive” and “Just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s wrong.”

The 80′s were a weird time. That outfit is a few inches of fabric away from having a codpiece.

In another Star Trek: The Next Generation episode, “Symbiosis,” we’re introduced to the Ornarans and Brekkians and we find out that after an ancient plague, the Brekkians started peddling an expensive and addictive drug to the Ornarans and calling it a “treatment.” There’s no plague anymore – the Brekkians just control the Ornarans through their drug addiction. Dr. Crusher finds a way to synthesize this drug and offers to help wean the Ornarans off their addiction, but what does Captain Picard do? He tells her to mind her own damn business because it’s not the Federation’s place to tell the Brekkians that it’s wrong to deceive and enslave the Ornarans through an addictive drug.

This episode also gave us one of the weirdest brawls in Star Trek history. Like a Reefer Madness for the 24th century, if you will. 

And this is the most uncomfortable part of moral relativism – who gets to draw the line and where do we draw it? On one end of the spectrum, we have moral relativism which claims anything goes – societies should be able to torture animals, employ the slave labor of children, and oppress women as they see fit – just as long as enough people agree it isn’t wrong to do so. At the other end of the spectrum sits moral absolutism, a theoretical construct that would result in a perfectly unified, homogenous culture, but one that would also strip away many facets of culture that lead to human diversity. 

If Star Trek is supposed to serve as a guide for how we might become a more progressive society, it does a terrible job a lot of the time. Now, there are many instances of our protagonists saying “to hell with the Prime Directive!” and taking what most of us would agree is the more morally praiseworthy route. But there’s no rhyme or reason to it. Just look at how they treat the Borg. Why is it ok to let some societies oppress men or drug another species into submission but it’s not ok to let the Borg assimilate the galaxy in their ultimate quest for perfection? 

I’m going to guess the answer is that until the Borg decided to stick nanoprobes in a Federation citizen, the cheerful little robots simply weren’t the Federation’s problem. We might argue that the Prime Directive certainly has provisions for self-defense - how ridiculous would it be to consent to being annihilated or assimilated just because the Federation is afraid of offending another culture and refuses to draw a line in the sand where right stops and wrong starts? The slope gets slippery here though. We could say this mirrors the concept of large Western nations trying to police the rest of the world and impose their customs on other societies - but how many of us watched documentaries about the Holocaust in school and wondered why the hell previous generations allowed shit to get that bad? How many of us continue to stand by while people in Iraq and Syria live under the threat of the Islamic State? I doubt most people even realize what’s going on in the Philippines or Venezuela right now because hey, “Not my country, not my problem.” It is a huge gray area for what constitutes forcing certain customs on unwilling societies and trying to genuinely help people, but if we can’t agree that Nazi extermination camps and religiously motivated beheadings are bad and need to stop (even when they aren’t happening to us personally), I’ll be surprised if we ever make to the 24th century. It makes me wonder how exactly Earth “solved its problems” and created a utopian society in the first place with this attitude of moral relativism.

Let’s face it – we have no shortage of modern travesties that sound ridiculous in the context of this philosophical approach. The Chechen Republic has been reportedly rounding up gay men and torturing them in recent months, and moral relativism would have us shrug and say, “But their culture says homosexuality is a sin.” 

To anyone who actually thinks that, fuck you. 

Bacha bazi, a practice where adolescent boys are groomed for sexual relationships with older men, remains pervasive in many Pashtun societies. Moral relativism would tell us that we shouldn’t condemn predatory pedophilia because to do so would mean unfairly imposing our Western beliefs on their culture. 

Just because one culture says widespread sexual coercion is ok doesn’t make it so. 

I could keep going on, but this post is already long enough. The bottom line is, all too often, Star Trek lazily glosses over a lot of moral and ethical dilemmas by using the argument, “Who are we to judge?” June is Pride Month, and in honor of LGBT individuals all over the globe who all too often have less rights than their cisgender heterosexual counterparts, maybe we should avoid looking to the “progressive” future of Star Trek and instead ask the question, “Who are we to not judge?” 

While I can’t resolve one of the greatest philosophical questions ever devised, someone once gave me a great piece of advice that I think applies to this idea of moral relativism: no person’s belief is inherently worthy of respect, but every person is. 

What does fanfiction teach us about writing?

On the internet, there’s no doubt about it: fanfiction is popular. In literary circles, it’s highly controversial. Some writers love the idea of their works being turned into fanfiction–is there any better form of flattery than a reader wanting to live in your world so much that they add to it? Others are adamantly against it–they claim its stealing or that they’re not comfortable with fans altering or adjusting or even adding to their worlds. 

But whatever your personal opinion may be no the topic, the truth is that writers have been creating fanfiction for just about as long as writing has existed. The great Shakespeare, credited with some of the best works of all time and the inventor of a good chunk of the English language, based almost all of his plays off of either histories or already known stories of the time. Some of his “original plays” are simply stage adaptions–with great creative license–of other works. And then of course, there are the modern examples, the most notable of which is Fifty Shades of Grey, the Twilight Fanfic gone viral.

The reasons we engage in fanfiction are pretty cut and dry: we love the world or characters, we want more, and it’s a fun creative outlet for fans and writers alike. But what can it teach us, and are their productive uses to fanfiction even if it never gets you famous? 

  • Fanfiction or canon based RP both force you to think in the mindset of a specific character. While there are always the examples of self-insert or “out of character” fanfiction (where the protagonist is greatly altered from their original form to better fit the author) for the most part, fanfiction is a perfect example of voice exploration. In order to best represent that character, the author must do extensive research into the source material and not just read for pleasure, but read for understanding. They have to track that character’s development, their dialogue, their history, and find out what exactly makes them click. The reader has to understand the character so well that they not only follow the story already written but move on to a whole other level: the ability to predict the character’s next move. 
  • It’s an empathetic exercise. In order to write fanfiction properly, you must be able to understand a character so well that you can place that character in any situation and know what they will do next. You have to know their psyche, have to be able to track their behavior, have to fully and completely understand them. That sort of empathy link can then  be applied not only to your future original characters but to the real world. It helps you interact with others because it forces you into a mindset where you see more than a person’s actions: you see their reasoning. You learn to track humanity’s cause and effect relations. 
  • It gives beginning writer’s confidence and experience. By posting on sites like or Archive of Our Own, beginning writers get to see first hand what it’s like to have an audience and how to interact with readers–before their career is on the line. This allows beginning writers to have first hand experience in seeing what readers respond to, what they want more of, and what they’d rather not see again. And because these sites have comment features, new writers will also experience their first reviews–for the good and the bad. 
  • It teaches writers to market themselves. Writers who publish fanfiction tend to want their fanfics read, and so they need readers. Promoting their fanfiction allows them to get first hand experience with selling their writing, beginning with a satisfactory summary for the fic to draw readers in, and extending to tagging, blogging, and advertising. 
  • It’s just good practice. Any writing is good writing. Even if that writing is terrible. Even if it never sees the light of day. Even if that fanfiction sits in a drawer for all of eternity, by engaging with and exploring that fictional world, the writer is able to put in the much needed practice that it takes to become a skilled storyteller. Sometimes it is easier to start with the known; sometimes we need the safety of someone else’s universe before we can engage with our own imagination. 
A response to “A Dog’s Purpose”

I’ve been wanting to post something about the shepherd in the TMZ/PETA video for a while and I ended up getting so irritated by comments on Facebook I posted something there. I figured I’d just post that one here, with a bit of editing now that I’ve had more time to think.

I’ve honestly been getting fed up with people on both extremes of this issue. There are people on one side saying “animals shouldn’t be used for any sort of entertainment purposes ever” and people on the other side saying “oh no it’s fine that’s the only way you can train a German shepherd without getting bit”. Neither of those things are true, so let’s break down what’s actually happening in this video. In terms of the dog’s body language in the video (as much as I could see with the poor quality of the video): it starts off with the dog leaning away from the water and into the trainer (which could possibly be seeking contact comfort, or just where the dog happened to be leaning), and although the quality isn’t great so it’s hard to tell for sure, there seem to be some tongue flicks as well as the dog being quite still and tense. All of these are stress signals dogs use to communicate that they are uncomfortable with a situation. Next, it’s hard to tell if the trainer started pushing the dog or if it was just the movement of his hand along the dog’s body, but for whichever reason, the dog attempts to leave the area but is held back by the trainer. The trainer then begins to lower the dog into the water while the dog flails and continues to try and flee. Once the dog is back on land, he tries to pull away again and his ears appear to pull back. Again, another stress signal. The dog then stops trying to pull away and the handler pats him, but the dog continues to lean away from him. Now the trainer and the dog struggle again, while the dog continues to try and flee, pulling his ears back again. It’s hard to tell the dog’s tail position throughout most of the video because he’s flailing it for balance a lot, but when he relaxes his tail it appears to fall into a low position, though not tucked, again indicating the dog is fearful/unsure about the situation. When the trainer finally lowers the dog into the water, the dog is still scrambling and trying to get out. He pulls the dog up again and then it cuts to the dog in the river with his head going under.

The shepherd in this video gave both subtle and incredibly obvious signals that he was not comfortable going into the water. I have seen arguments that the trainer did this to “get the dog used to it”, but this is not the correct method for introducing an animal to a scary situation. What is happening in this video is flooding (no pun intended). Think of flooding as taking a person terrified of spiders and locking them in a room full of spiders so they “get over it”. Not only is this ineffective, it can be very detrimental to the animal. I usually don’t like to anthropomorphize animals, but this is a case where I think it is appropriate to ask you to imagine someone forcing you into a situation where you had no chance of escaping one of your fears and I think you could get a pretty accurate feel for what flooding is like. Add in the danger of fast moving water with a dog that is already not comfortable with the situation and it’s not a good combination.

There is nothing inherently wrong with training animals for movies. Animal training is mentally stimulating, a humane fix for common behavioral problems, and fun for both trainers and animals (if it’s not, you’re doing it wrong). However, the training methods in this video were not appropriate or humane. If the dog was afraid of going in the river they could have tried a gradual desensitization, using a different dog, or CGI. There was no reason to force this dog into a scary and dangerous situation. The second the dog showed signs he was fearful and did not want to go in the water, the trainer should have stopped. There is no reason to use force in a training situation–especially one like this that is potentially dangerous.

The one thing I want to say about the rest of the film is that I don’t think this necessarily means every dog in this movie was abused and every person on the film crew was aware of what happened. I am concerned about what techniques this particular trainer used with other dogs (or the same dog in different scenes), but he isn’t necessarily the only trainer for the movie. What this means to me is that this particular trainer used inappropriate training methods and should face consequences for it (which I’ve heard he will be). I mistrust PETA, and they are notorious for doctoring videos to suit their needs. It is very suspicious to me that the last thing we saw was the trainer pulling the dog out of the water and then a sudden cut to the dog going under. It’s perfect editing to elicit a response from the public. That doesn’t excuse the dangerous and inhumane training techniques shown in this video and like I said above, makes me concerned about what other kind of training techniques this guy used on his dogs. The point I’m trying to make is film crews are quite large, and I hesitate to pass judgement on the entire crew and cast because of this one terrible trainer (and those that watched and did not intervene). I can’t help but be suspicious of PETA, they just have such a long history of editing and taking things out of context to further their animal rights agenda. You’re within reason if you don’t want to see this movie, but please be aware this is NOT the standard for training an animal.

imprints of the words you chose to say

A/N: so here’s a new one-shot! honestly, I’ve been meaning to finish this and put it up but after the election, I had lost a lot of motivation to really write. But, this was a great distraction– hope you guys enjoy it! feedback is always appreciated :)
Word count: 3,304


“Lucas?” She whispers, poking her head into her roommate’s bedroom. It was close to 3AM and she had yet to fall asleep because of that stupid horror movie she saw with Maya a few hours ago. Every time one of her body parts was peaking out of her blanket, she felt as if some sort of horrific clown was going to grab at her and possibly kill her. “Lucas, are you up?” She asks again, tip-toeing to the opposite side of his bed.

The blonde stirs in his sleep, his eyes fluttering open lazily. His vision is somewhat blurry as he makes out a feminine silhouette in the dark. He’s about to fall asleep again until he hears Riley’s soft voice call out to him. “Riley?” He questions, furrowing his brows slightly. “Are you okay? What’s wrong?”

She ignores the strange feeling in her gut at the sound of how husky his voice sounds from slumber. It’s been 2 years since the two have been roommates and it was something she couldn’t get enough of– not that she’d ever tell him that. “Can I sleep here tonight? I think I might die on my own,” She explains, as if it’s the most logical thing in the world.

Keep reading

One of my favorite types of Harry Potter aus will always be the “What if [your favorite character] got Sorted into a different House?”

Because while I don’t necessarily believe that a different House would really change who a character is as a person, it would still be a distinct environmental shift that would probably bring out entirely different qualities.

So here’s one I had lately – and pack your bags, because when I go on rambling insane thought vacations they’re never brief ones – sharing on the off-chance that hey it might amuse a handful of people. Because why not.

What if Lucius Malfoy ended up in a different House at Hogwarts?

Keep reading

seriously the catholic church considered canonizing this lady

Columbus, Granada, and the Morally Gray Catholic Monarchs

I know I just made a recent post about the family of the Most Catholic Monarchs (or rather, one—that one being Juana La Loca) but I just can’t resist making another.

A) Because I’ve just started Isabel, a Spanish series that is both very good and pretty accurate to the life of Isabel of Castile, especially when you compare it to American/British historical series.

B) Because holy shit these people were way crazier than we give them credit for.

Get drunk party hard

Keep reading

The Winchesters’ codependency

I’ve wanted to write meta about the Winchesters’ codependency since the season 11 finale aired. It took me a long time to finally start doing it because I needed to find the best way to explain this logically. In this post about 11x23 I said that Amara was NOT Dean’s love interest and that she represented codependency, and I promised to talk about that specifically in another post. So here I am ready to do my best.

When season 10 ended, many people were really upset. The codependence between Dean and Sam had reached a point where it wasn’t entertaining anymore. However, I understood what was going on. In fact, I tried to ease the fandom by writing this: 

“Both Kevin and Charlie were family and they died because of the toxic relationship between the Winchester brothers. They need to stop hurting people! However, the answer is not for Dean to kill Sam or for Sam to kill Dean. The answer is to let the other person go, to understand that they’ll be okay. Now that the narrative has turned both of them into the opposite of heroes (and that was ON PURPOSE), in season 11, somehow they should start anew. Their relationship should be different, but don’t expect that to happen all of a sudden. Baby steps, but that’s where we’re going.” (X)

Now that I reread what I wrote, I know that I should have seen what would happen between Chuck and Amara before it did. If I had done it, I would have known that neither God nor the Darkness could die at the end of season 11, because the answer was not for any of them to kill the other. The answer was to let the other go, to understand that they’ll be okay.

Why do I say that Amara represented codependency? Because of this conversation she had with her brother:

AMARA: Brother, I… In the beginning… it was just you and me, and we were family. I loved you, and I thought – I knew… that you loved me.

CHUCK: I did. [ Sighs ] I do.

AMARA: But then you went and you made all these other things. I hated them. I hated you for needing something else, something that wasn’t me.

Doesn’t that sound like Dean? They were a family and he thought his brother loved him, but then Sam left (to Stanford), chose Ruby, or stopped looking for him when he got sent to Purgatory. Sam was able to have a normal life a couple of times, and Dean resented him for needing something else, for needing something that wasn’t him.

Doesn’t that sound like Sam, too? They were a family and he thought his brother loved him, but then Dean decided to turn to other people instead of him (“another angel, another –another vampire? Sam asked in 8x23). Sam resented Dean for needing something else, for needing something that wasn’t him.

Both of them got people killed because of their inability to let the other go. Dean got Kevin killed; Sam got Charlie killed. (And hundreds of others, but somehow getting their “family” killed is always more shocking).

The conversation between Amara and Chuck continued:

AMARA: But I was wrong. What you’ve made… it’s beautiful. It took me a long time to see that. I know that we can’t go back to the way things were. I don’t want to, but I wish… I wish that we could just be family again.

CHUCK: I do, too.

This is what happened in the end:

Amara understood that she and her brother could still be a family despite Chuck having created other beings. It didn’t have to be only the two of them, and the fact that Chuck loved his creation didn’t mean he didn’t love her. They were different kinds of love. It was OK for Chuck to need something else, something that wasn’t Amara. But the thing is… Chuck never stopped loving her, no matter if he locked her away for eons of years. God loved his sister.

At the end of season 10, I knew the writers were trying to put an end to the toxic relationship between Dean and Sam. Now that season 11 is over, I’m sure they’ve done it. They fixed the first toxic relationship in the history: the one between God and the Darkness.

This is great news for our dear Winchester boys. You can say that season 11 still showed us a desperate Dean willing to kill himself to save Sam (in 11x17). However, as I said when that episode aired:

I think that something changed in this episode. What Dean did taught him a lesson. I think that he won’t repeat the same reckless behavior again. Why do I say that? It’s because of what Dean told Michelle, “This is gonna be very hard, but you will be OK. And eventually… eventually you’ll get back to normal.” That’s some advice that Dean should take for himself. And I think he will. Even though Michelle didn’t think she could have a normal life without Corbin, Dean still wanted to believe she could. When Sam asked about Michelle, Dean told him, “She’s strong. She’ll be alright.” That was not the feeling the audience got after her last words, but that was what Dean wanted to believe. He HAD TO believe that. He had to believe that if his brother died again, it would be very hard but he would be OK and would eventually get back to normal. Dean wanted to believe that he would be strong, that he would be alright. And because of that, I think his words were the first step to getting rid of codependency. (X)

I was sort of proved right five episodes later.

In 11x22, Sam agreed to bear the Mark that would lock Amara away. Dean was obviously NOT OK with that decision. How could he? But what did he say in the end? “OK, Sam.” He didn’t agree with Sam’s decision, but he respected it. (X)

As I wrote in my meta for 11x22, Dean was able to accept Sam’s choice, no matter if he agreed or not. He knew that if Sam bore the Mark of Cain, he would end up a demon or worse, but he let go. He let his brother make his own decision and that was BEAUTIFUL.

I really think that the end of the “brodependency” is here. I’m not saying that the brothers will stop loving or protecting each other. That’s not the point. But the moment they’re not able to live their own life, the moment they can’t go on without their brother, that shows some kind of unhealthy relationship that should definitely worry them. Love doesn’t have to be a codependent obsession. Amara learned that lesson, and I believe that Dean learned his lesson as well. (He was always more in need than his brother; besides, we knew Sam had learned his lesson since 11x01).

For all this, I’m SO ready for season 12. Bring it on, Mr. Dabb!

Zaynab Shahar

1. How long have you been polyamorous or been practicing polyamory?

I’ve been practicing polyamory for about five years now.

2. What does your relationship dynamic look like?

I identify as being solo poly. I don’t have a primary or secondary partner. I don’t place partners on a hierarchy. Instead, I focus more on having intentional, healthy, consensual, safe relationships with each partner in the time we spend together. Currently, I solo and single. My friend K.C Slack once tweeted that she sees her partners as constellations that are all important to her galaxy, or something to that effect. I remember reading it and thinking “that’s a damn dreamy way to think about it,” and since I’m a huge astronomy and astrology nerd that resonates with me on so many levels.

3-5. What aspect of polyamory do you excel at? What aspect of polyamory do you struggle with? How do you address and/or overcome those struggles?

I don’t know if the language of excel/struggle really encompasses how I understand myself, potentially because I read them as a wee too binary for my taste. I would say I strive to be a person who regularly utilizes active listening and compassionate response all in the context of providing emotional labor to my partners. I tend to focus more on providing emotional labor to my partners and really struggle with letting people in to do the same for me. I have trust issues based on having emotionally abusive relationships early on as a queer teenager, so I’m reluctant to just be vulnerable and share my problems with my partners for fear that it’s going to come back to bite me in the ass in the form of gaslighting.

Subsequently, I have a hard time allowing people to reciprocate partner care when it comes to living with chronic pain, and that’s something I routinely struggle with. For example one of the things I’ve realized in coming into polyamory and living with chronic pain at the same time is that people struggle with straddling the line between providing care and being ableist (even if they don’t intend to be). I started to realize this after my first non-monogamous relationship in undergrad ended my first year of grad school and my chronic pain struggles progressively got worse. As we were working on reconciling our breakup into a friendship she would spend time at my house when I didn’t have the spoons to leave the house. She was very intent on “helping me” but her version of help never included asking me what my accessibility needs were. She would just declare that she was going to do something for me, do it, and if I objected she would get offended without ever considering that she was trampling over my autonomy. Fast forward to the present, I walk with a cane and a visible limp. I have a hard time communicating to multiple partners what my accessibility needs are, and hell even keeping track of where accessibility/ableism conversations are at with all of my partners because I believe it’s an ongoing process. So I’m trying to learn how to be better at receiving; whether it’s care, compassion, listening, or love, and not just shut myself off to my polycule because it’s easier than trying to tell people what I want in fear of being hurt or disappointed at the outcome. At the same time, I’m learning how to straddle the line between receiving care and not having my autonomy trampled on. Like I remember the day after going on a friend date with another poly person, she texted me to ask how I was doing. I texted back to say that minus dealing with the typical amount of morning pain I was doing okay. She began asking me all these questions about me and chronic pain and I flatly texted her back “ya know I don’t find my issues with chronic pain all that fascinating of a topic of conversation.” Thankfully she understood that I wasn’t trying to be rude, but that sometimes when you live with a certain amount of pain of a daily basis talking about it ad nauseam requires you to focus on it more than you potentially care to. It wasn’t that I didn’t want to receive her concern, but I also don’t want to make my chronic pain the topic of post-date conversation. There are so much more fascinating things to be texting about at 10am in the morning, lol.

6. In terms of risk-aware/safer sex, what do you and your partners do to protect one another?

I practice safer sex practices with all of my partners, necessary contraceptives and all. Additionally where they are some partners who I engage in fluid bonding oral sex with there are others partners that I won’t. It really depends on our sexual dynamic, since all of my partners have overlap between engaging me in a non-monogamous sense and also in a BDSM/kink sense as well. So penetrative and/or fluid bonding sex doesn’t always come into play when it comes to the different sexual engagements I have with my partners.

7. What is the worst mistake you’ve ever made in your polyamorous history and how did you rebound from that?

I think the worst mistake I made in my polyamorous history was joining the Polyamory group on facebook that has like 20,000+ members. I literally witnessed a conversation where people were attempting to defend (tw: sexual violence) –> having sex with your partner while they’re asleep, which in my mind is an aspect of rape culture. The conversation just got wildly triggering and out of control as the subcomment threads kept pouring in. And I remember not only leaving the group but being deeply reluctant to join any poly digital spaces that didn’t have explicit anti-oppression and/or social justice commitments attached to them because watching people actively defend rape culture was just entirely too much for my psyche. But at the same time it was triggering for my it reaffirmed why anti-oppression poly praxis is necessary.

Quite frankly there are too many people floating out there in the polyverse thinking “oh just because I’m poly and oppressed by monogamous oriented society and I don’t have to do any critical introspection.” Meanwhile, at the same time so many folx within poly culture uphold oppressive ideologies that have dangerous implications to them they wonder why folx with marginalized identities avoid poly spaces like the plague. Like I don’t want to dispose of people who need radical re-education vis a vie oppression because disposability is a form of carceral logic. Our society already disposes of people who commit crimes without any consideration as to the societal conditions that make crime possible and in some cases necessary for survival, let alone our impulses to criminalize certain behaviors under the guise that it will make us safer when it hasn’t thus far. We dispose of people who are sick, neuroatypical, disabled, elderly in various ways because within the context of capitalism if you can’t be productive you’re rendered worthless. So if we relate this to poly culture, disposing of people from poly culture because they hold fucked up oppressive opinions might be good in the short term, but does nothing in the long term to actually bring about structure, systemic, and/or cultural change within our communities. If you ban someone from a Poly facebook group for upholding rape culture, that doesn’t mean the next edition of the Ethical Slut is going to have more extensive commentary on why it’s important to apply anti-oppression frameworks to the construction of our relationships and communities. One doesn’t translate into the other. Nor do those people really learn why what they said was wrong or fucked up to begin with, they just know they got banned. Additionally, the people in the group might be at varying stages of critical consciousness and maybe the only thing they take away from that is what not to say, which is only a small part of the picture. As these critical changes from margin to center are happening, we have to be careful not to replicate existing oppressive logics in order to regulate the safety of our communities. Now, with that being said, some people just can’t be saved. Like if you’re intent on being a rapist or defending rapists, with some Donald Trump style indignation or something, there’s no wiggle room in that time and place and that needs to be recognized and named. But just disposing of people because they don’t say the right thing all the time or they don’t pick up on certain things fast enough doesn’t work for me, cause unlearning (and really learning in general) is a lifelong process that can’t be shortcutted or treated as some sort of social currency to gain access to spaces.


Alright, so ever since the EVER SO KICKASS SEASON FINALE, I’ve wanted to draw Tirek like no-one’s business. Soooooo, here we are!

Tirek and my take on the G4 version of Scorpan. Since they didn’t really give him a full appearance, I played with his looks. I made based it off of a baboon, mostly because I kinda figured that’s what he’d look like if he WERE to show up for realsies. That, and Tirek’s face looks like a cross between a bull and an ape of sorts. Regardless, I had a blast drawing the both of them.

Okay, so now that Season 4 is completed, my headcanon book is going to span from season 1 to season 4. That means these two definitely have a place in Equestria’s history in the book, and I’ve headcanoned it so it would be expanded. So, I guess this could be considered a “sneak peek”, but either way, we’re off TO DEH HEADCANONZ!!!

**NOTE! TL;DReaders should be cautious from this point on; the post gets long. o3o**


Tirek and Scorpan’s official appearance occurs during the Shadow Era/Crystal Era, the very same era Sombra also appears (this point of history occurs a few years AFTER Discord). The three of them ally together in their quest for power and start with the Crystal Empire, where  the Crystal Ponies are drained away while the ponies themselves are enslaved (there were, of course, some ponies who willingly worked with the three and managed to keep their magic). Once the Crystal Empire is completely under their control, they all set their sights on Equestria. Due to their knowledge of the sisters, they don’t immediately attempt a coup; Tirek, Sombra, and Scorpan knows the Sisters are powerful enough to fight them, so they need more time to prepare. Namely, a way to rid themselves of the sisters quickly and suddenly. Their solution falls to something simple:


Scorpan is chosen to trek to Equestria to “scout out” the lands and begin to lay siege upon the nation with the planned assassination of the Princess Sisters. First and foremost, he is to try to get close to them by living among the ponies under a guise.

Scorpan living among the ponies for a few months actually has a lasting effect on him; he sees them beginning to prosper, getting along and co-existing with one another (even with others of different species who are native to Equestria), even becomes close friends with the powerful unicorn mage, Starswirl (who’s still young in pony terms, but to us he’s in his late 60s. Ponies have the lifespan of about 120 due to their innate magic). He even meets Celestia and Luna through Starswirl, who’s benevolence inspires him to change along with the impact Equestria has had on him. 

Scorpan returns to Tirek and Sombra with the hopes of convincing them both to reconsider trying to conquer Equestria. Tirek and Sombra refuses and, due to Scorpan unwilling to join the plan, attempt to murder him. They don’t as he manages to escape, but he is severely wounded; enough to warrant Tirek and Sombra to think they have a little more time to prepare for their invasion.

Scorpan flees to Canterlot and comes to Starswirl, bloody and frantic. The unicorn immediately sets out to get healers, but Scorpan insists on an audience with the princesses to relay urgent news. He then warns the sisters about Tirek, Sombra, and their plan to invade Equestria. Celestia and Luna have been aware of the unusual behavior of the Crystal Empire and had been attempting to look into it for the past few months (they were coming up with encrypting information such as discovery of dark magic and an increase in militia activity, but not enough to warrant a full-blown war.). They had their own militia on alert just in case something needed to be done, and now that there is solid evidence, Celestia and Luna say the word.

Equestria reacts; deploys their military to the borders of the Crystal Empire in preparation of war. The goal of the battle: militaristically, to destroy Sombra and Tirek as a threat and to re-establish the Crystal Empire (possibly as a part of Equestria) to increase their notability(?) among the other countries. Morally (specifically, one of the main reasons the princesses deployed the military), to liberate the Crystal Empire citizens from their slavery and release them and return their magic to them, to allow them to re-establish themselves as a country (to ally up with Equestria)

The war is relatively short, but no less brutal. Final battle with Sombra and Tirek is one of the most famous battles in Equestrian history; It involves those two, both princesses, Starswirl (maybe even Clover, Pansy, and Smart Cookie; haven’t decided yet) and of course, Scorpan (Scorpan’s aid in the battle giving them an edge with the element of surprise).

 Tirek and Sombra are ultimately defeated (with Tirek being de-powered). However, they weren’t fast enough to stop Sombra from putting a curse upon the Crystal Empire to have it dragged down with him along with their magic; only a few of the Crystal Ponies manage to escape (Celestia, Luna, and Starswirl manages to restore their magic from Tirek).

With the threat of Tirek and Sombra finally gone, Scorpan bids his friends farewell and returns from whence he came. Whether or not he will make another appearance has yet to be seen.


Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there we go! Headcanon stuffs. c: I think that’s about everything, too, but as always, feel free to ask me any questions if you have any. Other than that, thanks for stopping by! C:

SnK 65 Thoughts

Also, “Death awaits the loser,” is an unintentionally hilarious teaser because all I can think with that placement is that Historia and Eren are going to fight to the death and the winner takes all the plot significance.


Man, I can’t stop laughing. I’m just that happy with this chapter.

Fiction is being ever so kind to me this week.

Except for the part where I should probably pretend to care about Kenny now. Do I really have to do that? Isn’t it enough that I really want his coat? And maybe his hat?

I should just run off and be a cowboy. Much better use of time.

Keep reading

Where do you draw the line?

ska-ana brought up a really interesting point in a reblog I think deserves it’s entire own thread.

An interesting concept, but there has been something on my mind recently regarding anthropomorphizing animals, and that is: where do you draw the line?

Complex mammals like whales, dolphins, primates, elephants, etc. have been known to ‘grieve’ and express emotional distress, form alliances (friendships?), among other behaviors that might only be interpreted through our own human lens. It’s especially prominent with these mammals, as we begin to see so much of ourselves in them, and so much of the animalian side in ourselves. Some mammals are right up there with us (maybe surpassing us) in terms of mental capability, which again begs the question: with anthropomorphizing, where do we draw the line?

As far as I can tell, this is a question that various fields of animal science argue over constantly. Wikipedia summarizes the question of considering animal sentience pretty well:

Beginning around 1960, a “cognitive revolution” in research on humans[16]gradually spurred a similar transformation of research with animals. Inference to processes not directly observable became acceptable and then commonplace. An important proponent of this shift in thinking was Donald O. Hebb, who argued that “mind” is simply a name for processes in the head that control complex behavior, and that it is both necessary and possible to infer those processes from behavior.[17] Animals came to be seen as “goal seeking agents that acquire, store, retrieve, and internally process information at many levels of cognitive complexity.”.[18] However, it is interesting to note that many cognitive experiments with animals made, and still make, ingenious use of conditioning methods pioneered by Thorndike and Pavlov.[19]

The scientific status of “consciousness” in animals continues to be hotly debated. Serious consideration of conscious thought in animals has been advocated by some (e.g., Donald Griffin),[20] but the larger research community has been notably cool to such suggestions.[21]

Personally, I feel like how much anthropomorphism is okay really depends on the situation and the context. When talking about your pet dog, whom you have observed for a long time and whose body language and behavior you’re familiar with, it’s probably okay. When doing education in a zoo or aquarium, probably not (because it communicates incorrect information) except in carefully constructed metaphors that aim to enhance the learning outcomes of the interaction. When talking colloquially about animal science or writing a media piece, I would honestly say just no because of how easily misinformation travels. When doing research? Never.

Ska-ana brings up a really good point that many of the more complex mammals exhibit behaviors that appear analogous to human grief as well as other emotional states, and that those are hard to not interpret from human lens. As far as research is concerned, that’s currently one of the big debates about how to interpret. I had professor explain it to me thusly: we know from various studies that many animals are capable of experiencing physical states that appear chemically analogous to human experiences: e.g., stress, fear, and pleasure. What we don’t know is if, when they appear to be experiencing more complex emotional states such as grief, they’re experiencing it in the same way that humans do. That would likely need to be tested on a physiological level as well as a behavioral one to be able to safely hazard that they’re analogous states. Until that sort of research exists, the best thing we can do to accurately describe the experiences of these animals is to say that they ‘appear to be experiencing a state similar to the human experience of x’ and not that they’re ‘doing x’ - because it’s very unlikely that a whale or an elephant has any similar internal state to a human due to evolutionary and individual history, and immediately assuming an anthropocentric approach to their internal state is likely to lead us to completely misunderstand their actual experience.

I once had a professor say that the scientific study of animal cognition cannot be approached through philosophic arguments about sentience or sapience, because philosophy is inherently anthropocentric. Once you attempt to interpret an animal’s experience through the human umvelt, you’ve immediately removed all scientific validity because you’re studying a non-human animal with a non-human umvelt.

Followers, what do you think about anthropomorphism and where the line is drawn?

dezdee  asked:

You are of the few people I come across that I actually agree with when it comes to Gabriel. Your are also one of the few writers that doesn’t completely brush him off as a 2-Dimensional neglectful father. I honestly believe Gabriel is one of the saddest, possibly most complex secondary characters on the show. Since, it's definitely not Gabriel, do you have a theory on who Hawkmoth might be?

I kind of hijacked this post. Sorry about it. Uh, for anyone who reads the whole thing though, don’t take anything here to mean anything for my fics. Like, you’re not being clever. Most of this doesn’t apply, so don’t get your hopes up. 


Gabriel is far from being 2-dimensional. Is he neglectful? Yes. Is the relationship he has with Adrien abusive? Yes. But Gabriel’s behavior stems more from overprotectiveness than lack of care. He cares. A lot. Too much, in fact. He can’t connect emotionally to his son, but he keeps tabs on his every move and is more than willing to personally scold him when Adrien does something wrong. And when Adrien was in danger, he was clearly relieved when it was over. Gabriel is a bad father, and he’s not giving his son the correct attention, but it isn’t because he doesn’t care. I’m convinced he loves Adrien and is just very, very bad at expressing it. Does this justify his actions? Absolutely not–he’s still a terrible father. But love doesn’t always manifest in nice ways. 

As far as the Hawkmoth theory, I don’t know who Hawkmoth is. There’s a lot of evidence that points to Gabriel–especially the un-transformed scans of his face–but it seems almost too obvious to me. That aside, some of the key differences between Gabriel and Hawkmoth show when one is looking at them straight on. Hawkmoth’s cowl covers the sides of his face, so that’s not a valid indicator of bone structure (after all, we can’t see the outlines of Hawkmoth’s ears either), but what we can see of Hawkmoth is different. He has full lips, Gabriel does not. Hawkmoth has a sharper nose from the front. And Hawkmoth’s teeth are actually different than Gabriel’s (there’s a post on here somewhere that points it out in detail, but it’s true. Someone else can source it I guess). So this begs the question–if Gabriel is Hawkmoth, why does he have an entirely different facial model? I mean, that’s expensive, for one, and for two, of Gabriel being Hawkmoth is supposed to be this obvious, then why make those subtle differences. It doesn’t make sense. That aside, why isn’t Hawkmoth, if he’s Gabriel, wearing glasses before he transforms during the scene when we see his silhouette? With the time Hawkmoth spends as Hawkmoth, I can’t imagine he put on contacts specifically to transform–that’s just silly. Maybe his eyesight is corrected when he transforms, but that still doesn’t explain why he’d take them off. Bags and purses disappear when Adrien and Marinette transform, and then return. Certainly Gabriel’s glasses would have done the same. It doesn’t make any sense. 

If anything, Gabriel and Hawkmoth share a history of some kind, are maybe even related, but it just doesn’t seem totally cohesive to say with any certainty that Gabriel is Hawkmoth. 

But, let’s say he is. Okay, fine. That doesn’t mean he couldn’t have also been the Peacock miraculous. I see a lot of art of Gabriel as Hawkmoth and Mrs. Agreste as the peacock. This is impossible. At the beginning of Origins, Hawkmoth is taking direction from Nooroo on how to use the butterfly miraculous–these powers are new to him. Even if he has experience with other miraculouses, he hasn’t had the butterfly for very long. So this business of Hawkmoth and Mrs. Agreste having been Hawkmoth and the Peacock together isn’t feasible (unless Hawkmoth stole the butterfly from Gabriel, I guess…). 

That aside, Gabriel fits the profile for being the peacock (quite literally). Let’s look at some pictures now, shall we? 

This is Adrien Agreste - 

You know what’s really great about his design? The fact that he ACTUALLY LOOKS like a cat. When animators are creating characters, they’re very much aware of these sorts of things, especially if the character has any sort of connection with an animal. 

Not even joking here guys. You look at the contours of his face and it mimics a cat. Eyes a little further apart, which allows a bit more space for bridge of his nose, before it narrows only a little, and then the tip comes out with more shape. But it’s not just the tip–it’s the nostrils as well. It’s this shape that makes his nose look even more like a cat’s when he has his mask on. His cheeks also resemble a cat’s–rounder at the top before tapering in quite sharply. But lots of animated faces look like this–cat cheeks are very popular. What’s important to note is his chin and the ease with which it rounds out, as well as the width. This, with his cheeks, is what give him the actual cat look, not just what so many other faces mimic. 

Even his profile looks it - 

The shape of his nose bridge is sweepingly flat and the incline to his forehead is easy and graceful. No huge protruding brow bones here. Kid is designed to look like a cat. But that makes sense, right? 

Let’s look at another. 

This is Marinette - 

She’s what my father would say is “cute as a bug’s ear.” Marinette’s design is “buggy.” Now, it’s a little hard to pull up a picture of a ladybug and say “look, look, she looks like one.” Because she doesn’t. Buggy is that look of big, round, eyes, with teeny tiny facial features. There’s usually a kind of roundness to all the shapes in their face, which is what Adrien lacks. Marinette’s eyes are round, her nose is a cute little button, her cheeks are round. Her HAIR is round like a helmet (and antennas, but whatever). The point is, she looks like a bug. A cute, round bug, because Ladybugs are cute and round, but a bug nonetheless. 

So buggy. So, so buggy. Her buggy-ness is actually a little more exaggerated than your average pretty CGI main lead. That nose, so little, and those so very, very round eyes. Her nose looks like I might even be smaller than Anna and Elsa’s, proportionally anyway. And that’s saying something.

There are other characters that look like bugs too, but we’ll get to that in a moment. 

The point I’m trying to make here is that characters are designed in specific ways for specific reasons. Now, let’s look at Gabriel - 

Cripes, look at the beak on that guy. SO MANY sharp features. So pointy. But that HAIR! Who in their right mind styles their hair like that? What is his hairstyle even? All pointy in the back like that? Wth? In any case, he looks like a bird. Even the way his glasses form circles ad colors around his eyes mimic it. That aside, he’s a FASHION DESIGNER! And VERY FAMOUS! Hello?

“My name is Gabe the Babe and I like to show off and kinda be snotty about it.” Peacocks are symbols of beauty and nobility. Sounds kind of like modern-day royalty to me. 

You know who doesn’t fit the animation profile for the peacock?

This lady. She is even buggier than Marinette. The only other character in the whole show that is as buggy as Mama Agreste is, you know it, Chloe. 

Their noses are SO SMALL and their eyes are so big and slanted, and such pointy chins. I sometimes headcanon Adrien and Chloe being brother and sister for fics, because Chloe looks SO MUCH like Mama Agreste. I suppose you could argue that Mama Agreste looks kind of bird-like as well, but the eyes just throw it all off, and her pointy-ness is in the wrong angles. Gabe looks MUCH more like a bird than she does. 

Gabe ALSO has the color-codes for a moth, so there’s that to consider. But my point here isn’t to say that Gabe ISN’T Hawkmoth, only to say that, based on the evidence NONE OF US HAS, he seems more likely, to me, to be the peacock, or once been the peacock, than Mama Agreste. The thing that gets me about Mama Agreste is that in NONE of the pics of her can we see what holds her hair in place (I checked). She’s either turned a certain way or it’s covered. And this irritates the CRAP out of me. Because if we’re REALLY thinking that Mama Agreste was a miraculous holder, she was a BUG, not a bird. 

Yeah, you know what I’m implying. Her pointy-ness is much sharper than Marinette’s. Both buggy, one round, another, uh, sharp. Like, I dunno, qualities in another insect…

Where’s all my Mama Agreste Bee and Gabriel Peacock art? Huh? Where? NOWHERE! And I am sad. 

Now, here’s the time for some headcanons. Keep reading at your own risk. I, uh, do answer the original question. Eventually.

Keep reading

warpsbyherself  asked:

What is Dishonored about, really? (Like I can read the blurb on steam, but that doesn't tell me about why it is Amazing.)

Oh boy, where do I start. In the original game you are playing as Corvo, the personal bodyguard to Empress Jessamine—your implied lover—and you are returning to Dunwall from a secret mission which only you could be trusted with. Upon your return the Spy Master Burrows—who is encouraging Jessamine to basically slaughter the plague victims and wall up the city—remarks that he’s surprised by your arrival, seen as how you’re three days early. You don’t get to interact with him over this as he saunters off, presumably to be creepy somewhere else. Once you hand Jessamine your report, she gives a brief account of how the plague is killing the entire city, and how no one is willing to help them. At which point Princess Emily, your implied mutual daughter says “why are there men on the roof?” And that’s when the magical assassins come rippling out of the air, holding you back with magic, making you watch as Jessamine is murdered and Emily stolen into thin air. As you’re dropped to the ground you reach for the dying Empress who begs you to find Emily, before dying in your arms. At that moment the Spy Master and High Overseer Capmbell—sort of like the Arch Bishop of Dunwall—come rushing up with some guards, yelling that you have killed the Empress. You get taken down by a blow to the head, and the title screen comes up—Dishonored.

After that you awaken in prison, being tortured by Burrows and Campbell, who want to make you sign a confession admitting that your murdered Jessamine and stole Emily. You do not, and are sentenced to execution. The night before your execution however, a guard slips a key through your door, telling you it comes from a friend. You escape your cell, and this is where your choice as a player begins, either to carve your way through the rest of the game like a butcher, or sneak your way past guardsmen, merely doing their job. This becomes known as your chaos level. You escape, and are taken to a safe house and introduced to a group of people calling themselves Loyalists who believe in your innocence and want to find Emily and put her back on the throne. After this segment ends you go to bed and wake up in the Void, summoned there by a God known as The Outsider. The best way I can describe him is a cross between Loki and Cthulhu, but devoid of any actual evil. He’s just chaos, raw and ageless, watching the universe tick by with detached boredom. Occasionally something interesting happens, or to be more precise, an interesting someone happens and he hones in on them, offers them incredible power, then sits back to see what they do with it. Will they use it for good, or more likely, will they use it for evil. He also gives you a ‘gift’ of a beating heart which breathes secrets into your ear and helps you along your way. (spoiler alert, it’s Jessamine’s heart, this is why everyone in the fandom who read my first chapter of Sweet Music and the line about the heart tried to murder me, and are still trying to murder me for not updating it)

There’s various missions, all of them geared toward finding Emily, each with multiple means of completing the goal, some of them are intense and dramatic, others are just cracktastic (Lady Boyle’s mansion anyone?). The real genius in the game however, is in the subtle ways in which the characters change and react towards you, based on your chaos level. If you are a one man rampage, the world becomes more hostile toward you, the game becoming harder and harder to complete as more guards are stationed to try and curb your slaughter, and more plague rats breed, feasting on the corpses you leave behind. People react to you with fear too, and lose sight of their own morality. Which is incredibly evident in Emily, who once you find her latches on to you as her emotional guide. If you’re committing acts of murder left right and center, she will think that brutality is the only way to survive and be made harsh by it, her childlike drawings devolving into nightmare death scenes, her behavior erratic. If however you glide through the world only ever occasionally bonking someone on the head and find them a nice spot to sleep it off, the world is quieter, there’s less panic in the streets, and Emily will remain playful and childlike, drawing sweet pictures for you, including one that says “daddy”.

I wont ruin the finale for you, but lets just say your actions greatly impact how it all ends. Either Emily will become a good, wise ruler because you have shown her that good men can change the world, or she will know nothing but bloodshed, the need to be feared, and the chaos never ends. Of course, there’s also the third ending, where you can literally stand back and watch the world burn, listening to her scream your name for help as she falls to her death. (needless to say that final one is not canon, since Emily is the protagonist of the long awaited second game)

In the DLC you play as Daud, the assassin who murdered the Empress, and that is also interesting, and is affected by how you play the game as Corvo. Daud you see, regrets killing Jessamine, and is doing all he can to help save Emily from another unknown threat. Like Corvo, he is gifted powers by the Outsider, and like Corvo, his actions will dictate the outcome of the game, far more than any other game I’ve ever played that boasts a moral ranking system. Daud’s segment ends with a face-off with Corvo, and depending on how you played as Corvo, Daud will either live or die, regardless of how ‘good’ Daud’s actions have been in his dlc content. (I believe it is now canon, that he lives, but my god that moment when you fall from the roof and into the water bleeding out with Corvo standing over you is amazing)

There;s some other really amazing NPC characters with really rich and diverse history. I’m basically just in love with the whole thing and cannot wait for the second game.

Also the fandom is like 90% crack and unbridled emotional meltdown. It’s kind of great in a “I hate myself and want to hurt everyone with feels” sort of way…but then I’ve been told I have a particularly mean streak at writing angst fic *grin*