atwow hot take:
if jake had said his "son for a son" shit out loud and spider had heard him, he would have been so beyond pissed, he would be seeing red.
spider loved his little siblings so much, neteyam included, even after they grew apart. he loved them like they were his own blood and protected them like they were too (we see a lot more of them together in the comics, where spider is the big brother without a doubt). neteyam's death most certainly rocked him hard, even if he hasn't really been able to show it (how could he? he's already going through all the shit with his dad and the RDA and their nonsense, he can't grieve around neytiri, he's just so tired after it all. he doesn't have the room or the energy to grieve yet)
so if jake had the audacity to say that to/around spider not even a few hours after he watched his little brother get shot after coming to save him, after he stared at the bullet hole in his back, after he watched him take his last breaths, after he watched the light leave his eyes, after he watched his little brother die for him; if he said that while his little brother's body lay in a pool of his own blood not even ten feet away, not even cold yet, blood still clinging to his chest, the scent of it still filling the air: he would have lost his shit.
because the disrespect for his brother is wild.
jake was an active player in spider's neglect and abuse for the last 16 years, he let it happen, he helped it happen. he tried to send spider with the humans, tried to take him away from his siblings, from the forests, from eywa to live with his foster family that didn't love him (not to mention Nash was an asswipe of epic proportions) and the RDA of all people. he had referred to spider as a stray animal since he was little. he was the reason spiders life was hell.
and after all that, years and years of putting him in shit positions and allowing him to suffer the fate of being forever unloved and uncared for (by an adult authority figure, cause I love the kids, but they don't make up for the gap left by a parent), this is what it took for jake to care about him? his little brother had to die in front of him first? he had to be traded out to fill the space of a corpse, to fill in the gap left by his little brother's death?
in canon, spider was in deep in shock with nothing to break him from it, he wasn't in the place to really think about any of it, and I'm sure we're gonna see this anger in the coming movies, but if jake had said it out loud, that would have been enough to snap spider right out of it, and he would have given jake a piece of his mind, I just know it.
249 notes
·
View notes
ok tumblr deleted most of my tag essay on this post, so i've recreated and expanded upon it in its own post.
so the op of the post made a great point which really touched on why i've been feeling that i had a fundamentally different takeaway of season 9 compared to the rest of the fandom. i have a lot to say in response to this, not in argument but in support and synthesis of it.
i'll start with dean at the beginning of season 9: he has a great struggle in 901 regarding gadreel possessing sam, more so than any other struggle he's faced when saving sam's life, which points to me as him being aware of and conflicted about sam's history of possession. he understands this is crossing a line because it's similar to lucifer and meg, and so accepting gadreel's deal is violating sam to a length dean hasn't gone to before. dean by and large is the one who has this particular ethical problem (shown throughout the first half of season 9), not sam. hell, dean is the one who leaves sam once gadreel's out, without even waiting for input because his self-loathing is that strong.
sam, on the other hand, is more textually concerned in his 912/913 arguments with the lack of trust ("i can't trust you, not the way i thought i could") and dean's selfishness ("you did it for you"). this is an ongoing conflict sam has with dean, since the beginning of the show. dean doesn't trust sam to make his own decisions and therefore makes them for him, without sam's consent or knowledge. sam wants to be trusted to stand on his own, and he wants dean to put the same faith in him that he puts in dean. this is the core of sam's needs; the violation of autonomy is just an externalization of these needs and this conflict.
and i don't entirely disagree with the connection between going behind sam's back to keep him alive against his will and a rape narrative. both involve a lack of consent and a violation of agency. however, it really doesn't stop there, and it's a lot more complex than that.
and that's what rubs me wrong about more common interpretations of season 9 that i've seen. because this isn't really what the season is about. this violation on its own isn't the point. or if it is on the surface, it's equally about sam lying to himself about what it's actually about. he's consistently left out of major decisions regarding his own life and then lied to about it "for his own good," and he wants the right to choose his own path.
except, as we learn, that's not true. he lied about it. because the point of the whole season is that sam and dean are the same. they will make the same decisions to save each other over and over again. the point of the whole season is that sam has been lying to himself.
i said this in another post, but i think a big reason sam was able to lie to himself about this fact is because he's had the opportunity to let dean go on several occasions. he's been unable to save dean the way dean has saved sam. he fails where dean succeeds. sam has been forced to endure a grief that dean has never had to experience because dean always brings sam back. and so because sam has endured these experiences maybe he's more comfortable letting dean choose death in the abstract—the hypothetical. but in reality when it comes to that point, sam can't actually follow through, because he's just as dependent on dean being there for him as dean is dependent on sam.
and that's what season 9 is about. sam has been lying to himself about this reality from the start. this is why 1019 parallels 311 regarding how insane sam is about dean. it's reiterating the facts we've known but with a new perspective, now that sam is done deluding himself. he needs to accept that he was lying to himself and to dean, and this is what allows season 9 to close and for season 10 to begin, because season 10 is a response to sam's realization. he chooses dean over everything else in a monumental display of hypocrisy and genuine understanding of himself and who dean is to him.
seasons 8-10 should be taken as a single, cohesive unit, and the show goes to great lengths to enforce this. season 9 mirrors season 8, and season 10 acts as a response to and therefore a continuation of season 9. you can see this in the way charlie's death mirrors kevin's (one brother's lies and deceptions leads to increasing stakes that could have been avoided through honesty and openness, which culminates in the death of their beloved ally, and the deceptive brother blames himself for that death because his own unethical actions led to it), or how both of them undergo a change in their physiology as a result of godlike power entering their bodies which mutilate them from the inside and have fatal consequences (sam with the trials, dean with the mark of cain) which can only reasonably be resolved with their deaths (and they both even enter the final stages of this conflict by going to confession). also the plot structures of seasons 8 and 9 on their own mirror each other very closely.
this is all very important because it outlines the purpose of each of these two seasons. it's about them being fundamentally betrayed by their brother, causing that brother to become desperate and feel rejected and unloved, only for them to get what they need out of each other to reaffirm their love. they have to function as a unit, because otherwise both season's primary conflicts (as in, the conflicts established in the first half of each season) are left unresolved. instead, sam gets what he needs from dean in 823, which means that in return dean gets what he needs from sam in 923, thus closing the circle that was opened in 801.
dean reaffirmed that sam is the most important person in the world to him in sacrifice, that he would choose sam over every single other person on earth—this is what sam needed to hear, because it's the foundation of the conflict in season 8, since sam thinks dean chose benny over him and this sent him spiraling into a suicidal depression and self-loathing. so season 9, consequentially, is about dean getting what he needs from sam: he needs to know that sam will do anything in his power to save dean, which is a conflict that began in season 8 (with sam not searching for dean in purgatory) and is reasserted in 913 when sam tells him that he wouldn't violate his agency if the situations were reversed.
and this is exactly what dean gets in 923, when sam says he lied about all of that. dean gets the affirmation that sam's love for dean goes beyond petty ethics, which translates to "dean is more important to sam than anything else in the world" where the "anything else" includes sam's own moral boundaries. this is important to dean because dean eschews his own moral boundaries for sam's sake and safety over and over again throughout the series, and this is a major source of his own character development (see: 122, 203, 214, 222, et cetera et cetera). sam repeatedly denies that he's the same way, and has proven at least once that he wouldn't do the same, so this is an important affirmation for sam to give and it's why dean had spiraled into a suicidal depression and self-loathing (look, another parallel).
so season 8-9 are mirrors of each other, and they have to be mirrors of each other in order to work structurally and for any of the conflicts presented to be resolved. season 10 then is a response to this which shows the consequences of those dual resolutions: aka, sam acts just as unethically as dean does in the rest of the show, except this time knowingly and intentionally instead of subconsciously as he has been doing up to now (see: 1001, 1003, 1004, 1018, 1020, et cetera et cetera).
in order for all of this to work, the conflicts in season 8 and season 9 have to be equal. i.e. dean has to violate sam and his ethics as badly as sam violated dean and his ethics. it also has to be suitably Bad because it's revisiting a conflict that's existed in various iterations across the entire show. this is why it's also deeply important that 923 dean's death also parallels 222 sam's death, because it highlights how this conflict has always existed and how sam and dean are similar to each other. they both make the same choices under pressure and go to equally unethical lengths. which is why season 9 couldn't end until crowley told the audience that sam was trying to make a deal with him to bring dean back to life, specifically after dean begged sam to let him die. the point, then, was never about the violation itself: sam disregards dean's right to choose death just as much as dean disregards it. the season is about how sam and dean are at their cores the same, and it's about sam becoming aware of that reality and then actively, consciously choosing it. which is what sam reiterates across season 10, as a response to his choice in 923.
he only realizes that this is a Bad Thing in 1101 (i.e. after the response has run its course) when he says they both have to change. and the "both" is important because they are the same, fundamentally. sam isn't innocent of this violation of agency and obsessive deception of his brother, and he needs to understand that before actionable change can be made, which is what season 10 is all about.
and there's something poignant that can be said about 1023 being titled "brother's keeper," because this episode is about sam playing the role of brother's keeper, only for it to blow up so spectacularly in their faces that it causes the apocalypse 2.0. it forces sam to recognize that his original conclusion (that dean was right, and that he was lying) was not actually the correct and moral way to continue living. the significance of 1101 only reveals itself in the foundation laid by seasons 8-10, because these are the seasons about sam discovering just how down bad he is for his brother and accepting it wholeheartedly. season 11 then seeks to fix what seasons 8-10 broke, which is of course the entire fucking planet.
and this is the problem: the first apocalypse was caused by the absence of love, and the second was caused by too much love. their love is a destructive force that has world-ending consequences. that's the point of these seasons, what it all comes back to. in receiving the exact type and strength of love they needed from each other, they ended the world. and this is the conflict they need to resolve in season 11, or at least try to. because their love for each other can, has, and will destroy the world, over and over and over again. this theme can't exist unless seasons 8 and 9 mirror each other, unless season 9 is about sam's hypocrisy.
without that world-ending love, they couldn't have started the second apocalypse. if sam weren't a liar, he would have respected dean's choices, and he would have let dean die. if sam truly cared about bodily autonomy, dean would have died in 923 when he begged sam to let him. but he doesn't; that's not the point of the narrative. of course the violation of autonomy is important, because it provides the foundation for the conflict. but the violation is itself a metaphor, a triple whammy of symbolism: the possession is a metaphor for violation, and the violation is a metaphor for betrayal (as seen through the lens of deception).
the point of season 9 is not that dean metaphorically raped his helpless little brother; rather it's that the violation of agency goes both ways, and sam is a hypocrite for trying to maintain his autonomy while stripping it from dean. it's a continuation of season 8, which thus compacts his guilt over "abandoning" dean in purgatory and his self-loathing and fears of not being good enough or worthy enough of dean's love, which thus causes him to act recklessly and injuriously toward himself and dean. it's not a positive conclusion by any means; like i said, this is what causes the second apocalypse, and it's only after they've ended the world twice that sam finally sits down and says maybe they were wrong about this whole thing. maybe their love is too destructive.
in 912, sam says: "something's broken here [...] we don't see things the same way anymore."
in 1101, sam says: "this isn't on you. it's on us. we have to change."
sam goes from blaming dean to blaming both of them, because he realizes that they're both equal partners in their toxic, fucked up love. season 8 and season 9 allowed them to become equals by giving each other the affirmations they desperately needed to achieve true enmeshment, and season 10 is the consequence of that unhealthy relationship.
the point was never that dean violated sam. he does that over and over again throughout the series without destroying their relationship. the point is that sam is willing to violate dean all the same, and he had to face that reality head-on and accept it to resolve the conflict between them and give dean the affirmation he needed, just like dean gave sam the affirmation he needed in 823. the violation was simply a vehicle through which the conflict could come to a head, and the most provocative symbol this show could possibly use was the metaphor of sexual assault and rape, given sam's history with it via meg and especially via lucifer.
i've probably written enough now. the tl;dr is that season 9 invokes what can be interpreted as a rape metaphor not to vilify dean or even really to continue sam's ongoing rape narrative (though the violation that occurs in season 9 uses this as a foundation for the conflict and that's important to understanding the gravity of the situation), but rather to give appropriate stakes to mirror the primary conflict of season 8 and provide grounds for dean to get resolution for the conflict that began in 801 and continued through 923. god i hope this makes sense because now i've written this essay twice and i'm so miserable because of it.
my apologies if any of this is repetitive or meandering or lacking in any way; i tried really really hard to recreate my original essay and also provide more evidence and groundwork for my argument but obviously i'm sure i've missed some details and overlooked structure in many places. if you read this far, i love you and please talk to me about seasons 8-10. i'm losing my mind
26 notes
·
View notes
Hi, I'm really sorry if this does come off sounding rude. I've followed your 3h content for a while now so I was around to see the drama with raxis and things like moonlitboar occur. It really does suck and I've seen a lot of toxic edelgard stans myself in the fandom. I do understand how raxis does tend to block evade thus making it a prolonged conflict with no easy end. But I can't help but feel that the discord screenshots you've posted have not helped in resolving the conflict. I don't think that you have been wrong about the culture of toxicity inside the discord but I feel that the discord screenshots may have escalated the conflict since now there are people there who are becoming very paranoid about about "spying" (which in itself a little bit of a grey area because it is a public discord) . But I think that paranoia in the discord now has the potential to turn really ugly and further radicalize more people in the discord. And because there are some neutral people in that discord who do seem to want to just block and ignore/tired of some arguments, I think that an end to the discord screenshots would keep them from being swayed by the paranoia/ a sign of good faith. I really don't think that you are in the wrong when it comes to this whole thing with raxis. I think that raxis's actions and behavior do deserve to be called out in the past and present. But I just feel like trying to call out one person is one thing but a whole discord is just a very huge and impossible challenge. I think that the discord is just best left ignored as these people have clearly made it clear that they really don't want to be reasoned with or want to change and I think that they are getting really dangerous. I really do hope this doesn't come off as both sides are bad because I do believe that this problem has always originated from Raxis. Sorry this got so long and I really do wish you all the best.
It's no problem; I understand where you're coming from.
What I feel about it is this: people from outside the server did not know the depths this server was sinking into. Leaving them alone as we have been would have resulted in them continuing to go on as though everything was fine as long as they confined their rhetoric to a certain spot; I feel it's important to remind people that that is not true, as that would only isolate the problem while doing nothing to actually rectify it or stop it from getting worse (even though this of course isn't going to magically cure everything either, to be clear).
Even well before I posted these specific screenshots, they were paranoid about the entire fandom "persecuting and targeting" them for "no reason," they were paranoid about how everyone is "out to get" Edelgard in FE's general fandom spaces, they were paranoid that every single other person who ever criticizes them is some form of evil bigot (which would normally be a bit of an exaggeration, if it wasn't for them genuinely saying this every single time something like this happens); at worst, this will just be used as yet another scapegoat to continue their self-fulfilling prophecy of being generally disliked in the fandom. At best, this warns people about what's been going on - a miracle could even happen and some of the people in the server can see what the higher ups in their server have been letting slide and leave.
I called out Raxis because of the harm he was (and, frankly, still is) doing to others, and I am doing the same to the Edelgang discord because of the harm their mods have either allowed to happened or have outright participated in themselves. Given the general consensus of people from the outside's reactions (that being shock and/or disgust), I think it's ultimately important to warn people of harmful actors and the rhetoric they spread.
Especially given how they responded. If there was any sign of remorse for what was done - Shandale disavowing their previous beliefs, or if that didn't happen them getting unmodded/banned/some sort of action done from the mod team, or even just some pushback from the general members (something they were more than ready to do in defense of Raxis, and something they were willing to do when these sentiments were first said) - I would have been more than ready to delete the screenshots and apologize for showing them. But their defense of it - that it was "taken out of context," as though what was said could ever be alright to say, as though they do in fact stand by them - shows the importance of calling this behavior out.
They do not think it was that bad. They think these sentiments are okay to have, as long as they are in the "right context." And I don't think it's okay for people to not know that given how dangerous the rhetoric is
33 notes
·
View notes
I think I have diagnosed Griffith with 2 things after reading the manga, but am curious to know what you think
1. Narcissism. His entire worldview revolves around him. He thinks he is the protagonist. When he states that he can only respect another person who has their own dream and would do anything to make that dream a reality, he is putting a tremendous amount of weight on his "respect". And when someone actually does what the fuck he claims will earn his respect, he doesn't give it, because in the end it breaks his ego. In the eclipse, it's unearthed that deep inside, all along, he believes that all of the individuals in his army exist, living or dead, to serve him. That they died purely for him, not even considering that they yearend a life that was better then what they had, and surviving the front could have granted that. He never felt for a second that he actually owed anything else to anyone else.
2. Sociopathic tendencies: Griffith lacks true empathy. He views the world, and it's moral balance as a ledger, that he can add and subtract pros and cons to equal the karmic balance in his own eyes, and as such he "Greater goods" a ton of stuff that the fandom excuse or don't even consider prior to the eclipse, like burning the queen to shreds and sending guts on an assassination mission. He sells himself off to Gennon for the "good of his army", but this is just Griffith making ends meet to continue his ambitions of conquest, all of which are for his purpose. He excuses great amounts of evil because he is a narcissist and a sociopath. Other people's genuine state of being are not within his comprehension, and their situation is meaningless to him.
I gotta be honest, I'm pretty surprised you don't already know my opinion on this, since like my whole Fandom Brand is being a Griffith stan who thinks he's a genuinely good, empathetic person as a human lol, and I feel like I discuss that all the time. If you're very new around here and haven't really read many of my posts yet, then yeah, fyi we have deeply differing takes on Griffith.
And just as a warning, around this corner of fandom you're pretty much just going to see exasperated disagreement with this opinion, because it's what the majority of (English speaking) fandom tends to think about Griffith and the people who follow my blog tend to be pretty tired of it.
If you're genuinely interested in my own thoughts though, I'll link a few posts that explore my take on Griffith's personality in some depth:
Do I think Griffith is cruel
How Guts is not a better person than Griffith
Quick take on the Eclipse sacrifice
Griffith and power/control
The meaning of the Promrose Hall speech
Why Griffith lost his shit during the second duel
How Griffith both parallels and contrasts Gambino
Griffith's feelings for Guts are positive
Griffith's entire internal conflict throughout the Golden Age examined at great length
And just as an additional note, I generally don't engage with media through a psychiatry lens. Diagnosing fictional characters with personality disorders isn't my kinda thing unless the text is heavily implying it, because I view characters as tools that exist to help construct the meaning of a story, not as real people. If the narrative isn't interested in clinical psychology, then neither am I, basically.
But needless to say if Griffith was real I don't think either of those diagnoses would fit him, based on my layman's understanding of sociopathy and narcissism, for reasons I've discussed a lot in those linked posts, among others.
35 notes
·
View notes