Fandom Opinions - Blog Posts

A list of my most unpopular ASOIAF opinions and theories

Please remember this is all based on the books alone, and there also might be SPOILERS for Fire and Blood and the Game of Thrones book series.

ALSO I might open the requests for Game of Thrones fics and headcanons, and maybe for Baldur's Gate as well once I get back into it.

Okayyy so here we gooo.

1. Maegor's story doesn't add up

Don't get me wrong, he must've obviously been a horrible king and a shitty husband, but reading the chapters that talk about him in Blood and Fire, it all just felt like a list of rumours and versions of all nefarious crimes he would've committed. There are about five versions of whatever he did with each wife of his, each of them more depraved than the one before.

Again, I don't think he was an angel or anything, but my theory is that his history was written by biased sources. His reign was made illicit by Jaehaerys, so it would've been in his best interest to have him remembered as nothing more than a viscious monster.

It's a form of "damnatio memoriae" that we've already seen, in a way, with Mushroom and the Dance of Dragons. When in a conflict, and especially after a victory, each side wants to depict the side they beat as badly as possible Caesar did a similar thing in "De Bello Gallico", the book about his conquest of the modern French and Swiss territories. In this book he excuses his conquest with the supposed preparations for an attack by the Helvetians, a fact that was proven to be misinterpreted as it was a mere pacific migration. And again, he did the same thing when he accused them of cannibalising each other while being under siege, another untrue fact made up to just make them seem worse.

So in a way, Maegor's reputation could've been made worse by following historians to legitimate Jaehaerys' reign over Aerea's claim.

2. Incest has no effects on Valyrians

Okay, this is a bit weirder. My theory is that Valyrians practised incest because it had no effect on their offspring.

Looking at the Targaryen family tree, I noticed that the cases of madness increase the more Targaryens marry with other houses. Baelor the Blessed was the first mad Targaryen, and he had a grandmother of house Harte and a great grandmother who was half Arryn.

Before Baelor, Helaena is questionably considered mad as well, which would prove my theory furthermore had it not been for the amount of trauma she endured in her life so I'm honestly not gonna count her as "mad". Rhaegel Rargaryen was the second confirmed mad Targaryen, with a Martell mother; his daughter Aelora is questionably considered mad too, and her mother is an Arryn.

Aerion Brightflame was another mad Targaryen, with a half Martell father and a Dayne mother. The last two mad Targaryens were Aerys II and Viserys III, but at this point, the bloodline was mixed with others enough to make the Targaryen madness an unpredictable factor.

3. There is no good or bad in the Dance of Dragons

So I think we could theorise that Valyrians can perform incest so long as it remains within pure Valyrian blood.

Edit: some of you have pointed out how there were other signs of incest complications in the Targaryen family such as malformities and stillborn babies. I really am no biologist and I don't want to dwell into that "Valyrian race supremacy" craziness, but those cases are once again always correlated to marriages between Targaryens and other houses, for example all of Maegor's stillborn and unborn children (as 5 out of his 6 wives were not Targaryens/Valyrians) or the following cases.

Rhaenyra had a claim on the throne because of Viserys' will, but Aegon had a claim on the throne because of the laws of Westeros themselves. You can argue that Alicent wasn't the nicest stepmother, yet you can't look me in the face and tell me a woman in the middle ages married to a KING to whom she had given THREE SONS wouldn't complain when the king dismisses all of them and their claims in favor of his firstborn daughter.

Otto may have manipulated Alicent, but that was just how a Lord was supposed to act in that situation: have her marry the best candidate (the king), have her birth at least a son (she did) and make sure those children are first in line for the throne (as it should be, by the laws).

Viserys shouldn't have remarried if he already had his heir, period.

At the same time, Rhaenyra had every reason to fight for her claim and try and go against the actual laws of Westeros, but it was inevitable that many would've seen badly her attempt at claiming what was Aegon's birthright.

Lucerys was an asshole for mutilating Aemond and never showed remorse, quite the opposite. Aemond was an asshole who shouldn't have had all the power he had, plus I hardly believe his and Alys relationship was really consensual so there's that..

In the end, they all had their rights and wrongs, but that doesn't matter at all. The only point about the Dance is the fact that a pointless conflict led to the downfall of one of the strongest families in Westeros history.

4. Rhaegar didn't love Lyanna

I hate the series for making them marry. Like, seriously, have D&D ever read the books? Have they not read what happened between Maegor and the Faith when he took another wife??

Never, not even in the most twisted of universes, would the faith let Rhaegar kidnap and marry a Stark girl while he was still married to Elia. That just wouldn't be plausible.

And I also don't think he'd just fall in love at first sight with a random girl at a tournament. She was a beautiful soul and had many qualities, but she had nothing that could truly make a man throw away his whole life to pursue her.

He needed another child. The dragon has three heads. He had Rhaenys and Aegon, but Visenya was missing (I just made up the name for the third possible child considering he was naming them after the three conquerors lmao). He needed Lyanna to have that third child, and he knew how to get her to get what he wanted.

Perhaps we'll find out this isn't true. Perhaps Rhaegar really was head over heels for Lyanna, but I honestly really really doubt it.

5. There is no certainty on who the Prince that was Promised is

No matter what the show wants us to see, we still don't know who it is. It could be Daenerys, it could be Jon, it could even be Stannis and we're not gonna know it until Martin reveals it.

I honestly think Daenerys is Azor Ahai, but I'm still curious to see why we would need to revive Jon then. And considering Stannis' sword possibly being Azor Ahai's sword, is it a fake one made by Melisandre to get what she wanted from him, or does he actually possess the original sword?

Well, these are the first theories and opinions I could think of right now, I might post more in the future. Again, please don't slander me in the comments, these are just my personal opinions and I respect all others.

Ahah yeah looks like I hate FP

Using the novelization of movies as evidence for something in the movie itself is really stupid.

Mainly, I'm saying this because the writer of the novelization is often a different person, who is tasked with 'expanding' on the source in their own way. Sometimes given early versions of the script to work off of, which were already scrapped for one reason or another.

So, the writer of the novelization will have a different interpretation of the story/characters than the original writers, and the movie's ideas and entire point may end up getting muddled and overshadowed by the biases and perspective of the novelization's writer.

So, to me, novelizations of movies/tv shows are far more like remakes, not bonus scenes. It follows the same formula, but it's not the same. So it makes no sense to use them as evidence for something in the original movie, whether it be about character, plot, or worldbuilding.

Same with movie-tie in video games, etc. People don't use those as 'evidence' from what I've seen, but I've seen people use movie novelizations as evidence, and it bothers the hell out of me.

Idk, I just wanted to make this post, because I'm annoyed.

Headcanon idea: Loki is the secret affair child of Frigga and Laufey.

No Jotun we ever saw in the MCU had hair, right? But Hela has black hair, just like Loki has, and has a familial resemblance to Loki, despite apparently not being related to them, but supposedly being related to Thor, who looks nothing like her. We're also never given a potential 'mother' option in the movies, so there's nothing to say this might not have been the case. Frigga and Loki also have a resemblance to each other, which also strengthens the idea, imo.

My theory basically turns Loki from the adopted child, to the half sibling of both Thor and Hela, and the product of a secret interspecies affair that the royal family is trying to cover up. Coming up with the idea of an 'adoption' as a last-resort explanation in case Loki's Jotun heritage ever came to light. (Basically throwing Loki under the bus for being related to a race demonized in Asgard.)

Odin resents Loki (And somewhat resents Frigga, explaining why we never see them interacting outside of Odin commanding Frigga to 'leave' at the beginning of Thor Dark World.) for being the product of his wife's affair and the son of his enemy, thus why he's so distant from them.

I think, if we ignore the bias and retcon-filled phase 4 (Like we should), it also explains why Loki might be smaller than most Jotuns. It's because Loki isn't a full-blooded Jotun, Loki is a half-Jotun. (Which explains why Loki can learn Asgardian magic when we've gotten no indication Jotuns can do so, etc.)

I dunno, this theory came to mind and I wanted to share, lol.

Person: Hey, don't call that MLP character 'Derpy Hooves', that's insulting and ableist! Me: Oh, okay, what should I call her, then? Person: Call her 'Ditzy Doo'. :) Me: ...How is 'Ditzy Doo' less insulting than Derpy Hooves? Person: Well, 'Derpy' is ableist towards people with mental disabilities. Me: And 'Ditzy' is a misogynistic insult towards a woman perceived as stupid, especially if they're a blonde (Which Ditzy happens to also be). ...And you think naming a FEMALE CHARACTER 'Ditzy' is fine?

Can someone explain why people say this? How is 'Ditzy' less bad than 'Derpy'? /gen

Maybe I'm just jaded from Pokemon disappointing me, but I genuinely don't think Legends Z-A is going to do anything fun with the starters.

In fact, I don't think they'll do any new megas at all. No new megas, no regional forms. I will genuinely even be surprised if they decide to give Chikorita the fairy type, like some people are speculating.

I also feel like reigonal forms won't happen partially because it doesn't make sense. X and Y didn't have regional forms, after all, and Z-A is taking place after X and Y. Not even that far into the future, by the looks of it.

I feel like it'll just be a blander Legends Arceus, personally. If even that.

I hope I'm wrong, but that's where my head is at right now.

Leon in the original Resident evil games is fucking annoying. (Especially in RE:4) Like oh my god- shutthefuckupfortwoseconds, you action hero cardboard cutout with the clunkiest dialogue ever, fuck-!

I actually like his character in the remakes, though. His humor and one-liners feel far less grating to me in the remakes.

I know people like to rag on him because Resident Evil has trouble depicting trauma and stuff, but honestly, I prefer the writing in the remakes.

Leon in the original feels way more like the 'edgy emo' that people like to claim remake!Leon feels like imo. The constant action hero lines in the original RE:4 feel super tacky and take me out of the game a lot. (Especially the 'sing kumbaya' one at the very beginning, that one felt really awkward and clunky as hell.)

I think I'm already tired of the 'all of one character groups into a collective of multiverse heroes' trope. Or whatever you want to call it.

I just tried to watch 'My adventures with Superman' and I was mentally checked out the entire seventh episode as soon as we found out about the 'league of Lois'.

Honestly, that trope is so dumb. I'm not the only one who thinks that, right?

Blood and Honey 2 = FNAF movie

Watched both the FNAF movie and Blood and Honey 2, and you know what? ...I feel like these movies should've traded tones.

When you hear a 'Winnie the Pooh horror movie', I personally think 'Oh that's silly', so the tone of the FNAF movie would've probably been more appropriate. So, it's horror, but it's silly horror, like the modern IT movie (Chapter 1) with the weird nonsensical 'cleaning up the bathroom' scene. It also would've helped a lot of the goofier dialogue jokes they tried to make. (The whole 'Let's Bounce' thing, for instance.)

Meanwhile, FNAF is a horror franchise at it's core about children being lured away, murdered, then stuffed into suits where they rotted until they possessed them. ...That deserves a way, way more dark tone than we got in the FNAF movie imo.

Either way, I can confidently say that Blood and Honey 2 stole its plot from the FNAF movie, but despite that, I had more fun watching Blood and Honey 2 than I did watching the FNAF movie. The only parts I actually really had fun with the FNAF movie on were the cameos, tbh, which is definitely a bad sign. (Like another series I know, if the thing you enjoy about it is the references to the original source material, then it's not a good addition to the franchise.)

I know why FNAF is sillier, because the franchise for some reason is trying to appeal to kids, now, but still. You can make horror for kids that's kid-friendly while still being scary and interesting, guys, come on.

I finally caught back up on The Dragon Prince, and I gotta say, I'm glad the newer seasons got rid of that odd and awkward pacing and writing issue that the fourth season had.

Also... (MAJOR SPOILERS FOR THE DRAGON PRINCE SEASON 3, 5, & 6)

Not me crying while Viren sacrificed himself to cast the cinder heart spell. Damn-

Not me also crying during Aaravos' flashback with his daughter, oh my god. They really had to have him tell her to 'close her eyes', didn't they? (Also, I'm not the only one who suspects Leola had autism, right?)

I also didn't expect how much blood was in these two seasons. WOW. What age is this series geared towards again? TV-Y7? First Viren gets stabbed in the chest in season 3, now there's a bunch of blood spread in a ritualistic rite for dark magic? Yikes! (Also, in season 3, Soren stabbed Viren in the heart, right? Now Soren has Viren perform dark magic that requires a rune in his heart. Coincidence? I don't think so.)

Oh, but I love this series. I cannot believe that they actually got me to care about Viren, though.

I also gotta say, I love that none of my theories end up being right. I have so many every season, and then the story just keeps taking a left turn to somewhere completely different.

Anyway, now I'm just gonna sit in a box like a cat and wait for the next season.

You know... it's funny that the movie that has a more accurate wolverine costume ends up being the most box office breaking, huh?

It's almost like... I don't know, maybe you should have people who actually know the original source material working on movies involving comic characters? Unlike some people I know?

I tried to watch Demon Slayer. ...I could barely get through the first episode.

I don't know, there's something about the writing that bothers me. The visuals are nice, but other than that, it's just not interesting to me.

Obviously, I tried to give it its due and watched a couple more episodes after that, thinking maybe it was just one of those shows with a bad first episode? ...But no, it's just like that.

I don't get why people like this show. The writing and direction feels awkward.

Me, realizing 'Stolitz' is end game for Helluva Boss apparently, and now getting to the point of wanting to avoid the show because these two definitely aren't in a healthy relationship.

Man, why - other than fan service - would Viv want these two to be together? It's so toxic!

I'm not saying Stolas is free of blame, here, but I feel like they're equally bad for each other. They're equally using each other albeit for different reasons. It's a toxic situation for both sides and I don't see how people keep forgetting that Blitzo is constantly doing a 'hot and cold' act with Stolas. Please, do not do this Viv, come on, now. Please make the end be Stolas and Blitzo permanently breaking up and moving on to healthier relationships.

The 'Loki Series' is to Loki what 'Allstars Batman and Robin the boy wonder' is to Batman.

While both grossly misinterpret the characters they're using, pull stupid unnecessary fanservice, take leaps in logic, have very little consistency, romanticize abuse, and blatantly spit in the faces of the original characters, at least Batman doesn't have an incest relationship in the Allstars comics.

Either way, both of them sound like they were written by edgelords.

Gotta love how when the third episode of Helluva boss came out, people for some reason just started taking the Chrub's word as 'gospel' (ha).

The cherubs said 'Yeah no, there's no way to get back into heaven, sorry' and people immediately decided 'oh, I guess they're correct!'

As if the whole point of Charlie's story isn't to prove that Heaven is incorrect about that.

Apparently, characters in a story are unable to lie or be wrong about something anymore.

Can I please walk two steps into the Hazbin fandom without people blatantly erasing Alastor's aro-aceness?

"Oh, but some people who are aro-ace want relationships!"

Yeah, but that excuse gets really fucking old after a while when you seem to use it for literally every asexual character you see, dude! Especially if they're a character you happen to find attractive!

Your aphobia is showing and you're really not doing a good job of hiding it!

I'm trying to prove a point to my brain: Reblog if you think fanfiction does not need sex to be good.

There is a trend I’ve noticed that smut fics tend to be much more popular than anything else and honestly I just want to have something to look at to remind myself and that writing doesn’t have to have sex to be worth putting out into the community.

Thought dump now that I've watched Hazbin Hotel. (Major Spoilers)

I watched the first season of Hazbin Hotel and gave myself a few days to let it simmer in my head, and now I have thoughts.

(Note: I don't count anything Vivs has said on podcasts and livestreams as being canon, only what shows up in Hazbin/Helluva is canon to me, so please don't try to 'gotcha' me with anything from a ten-year-old livestream or something, lol.)

The opening scene mentioned that Adam and Lilith were equals and that Lilith left after Adam tried and failed to control her, right?

Well, as someone who was raised Christian, I'm assuming that might be a misdirect, given the bible's version of those events actually meshes a bit better with the vibes I'm getting from the story so far.

You see, in the bible, it's actually mentioned that god created Lilith to serve Adam, not that they were made as equals. God created Adam first, then Adam grew lonely and god created Lilith to be subservient to him. However, Lilith proved too independent and was replaced by Eve - who was literally 'made' more subservient due to being created through one of Adam's rib bones. (Side note: Adam eating ribs in the show is hilarious.) After Eve's creation, Lilith was basically kicked out of paradise and became a demon.

Now, I'm not saying that the story will/should make it exactly that, or that I expect it to be 'more accurate'. What I am saying is, I think at some point, we might end up getting a 'hey, god's a douche actually and enabled Adam like an entitled child and that's why he's such an asshole' angle to the story.

I think this fits mainly because there seems to be a 'heaven isn't all it's cracked up to be' vibe, as well as the fact that from what I've seen, the older testaments are the versions Viv is using mainly for inspiration and the older testaments, if you know anything about them, tend not to characterize god as being the most... 'merciful' sometimes. (Turning people into salt pillars, drowning the entire world, asking Abraham to sacrifice his son on a mountaintop, etc.)

With that in mind, I also feel like Adam's probably gonna come back. Not as an Angel, but as a demon. At the end of the last episode, we saw Sir Pentious return to life redeemed and in heaven, so it only makes sense in my mind that if it works one way, it must work the other way around, too.

I feel like it'd be a pretty cool plotline if Adam got pulled into Charlie's Hazbin Hotel to try getting redeemed only to end up actually becoming a better person through it. With Adam's redemption becoming a way for Charlie to prove she was right definitively to heaven and maybe having a narrative timer since Adam technically counts as a sinner and would likely be targeted by the exterminators, who would have no reason to believe this 'sinner' claiming to be Adam was actually the real Adam.

Forgive me if there's something in the comics that makes these opinions obsolete or something, I haven't read all Marvel comics, but-

I think it's ridiculous that the MCU made Asgardians aliens rather than actual gods. Especially given that they made Egyptian gods canon later with Moon Knight.

First of all, if you're gonna make some of them gods, why not make all of them gods? That doesn't make sense? Second, someone pointed this out in a post I saw some time ago, but based on the timeline and the canon ages of the characters, it makes no sense. According to that 'canon' timeline, Loki would've been a child during the time the Norse would've known about them to create stories, which doesn't align at all. So even without the Egyptian gods, it makes no sense.

Yeah, yeah, I get it, the 'Eternals' and shit, but like-... really? Maybe I'm biased just because I know the original runs had the Asgardians as actual gods with immortality and everything, but that makes far more sense to me then the MCU handles it. I'm just saying.

I could go on multiple tangents about stuff in the MCU, especially about stuff after Phase 3, but honestly, I would really rather pretend Phase 4+ doesn't exist and just keep my imperfect, but still fun, Phases three and below (Minus Ragnarok).

Finally watched Across the Spider-verse, initial thoughts:

I love how Across the Spiderverse basically went out of its way to say that things like the spider society and the TVA are fascist. That's my favorite thing, lmao.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got major 'We don't talk about the MCU in this household' vibes from Across the Spiderverse. They made reference to it, yeah, but it felt more like it was a joke than anything else. (Which I appreciate, because modern MCU is trash.)

Not Hobie Brown being suddenly added to my list of favorite Marvel characters, lol. (Along with Pavitr Prabhakar, oh my god.)

Excellent. Kind of wish it didn't end on a cliffhanger, but if that's what you have to do to tell the story well, I'm more than willing to wait on what happens next.

Saw this on Twitter and wanted to share.

If I made a Batman movie, I'd cast Robert Carlyle as Scarecrow/Jonathan Crane.

Look at the roles he's played and tell me that man wouldn't do a fantastic job. Whether you want him more serious, or more 'hroo hraa'-esq, he'd play the part well.

I feel it in my bones. He's the ultimate choice.

Zootopia spoilers, I guess:

When I watched Zootopia the first time, I honestly thought it was going in the direction of the savages being animals who contracted rabies. Especially after seeing the scene with Manchas, I thought: 'Oh, Emmit scratched him, and because of that, he contracted rabies from him.'

...So, what I'm saying is: The actual plot of the movie was disappointing, tbh.

People assuming the predators were going savage only to figure out it's not the predators at all, but a virus that makes you super aggressive and violent? That just sounds interesting. Discounting entirely the sucky 'twist villain' thing. Making the movie have no real villain other than the discovery of a crazed viral outbreak?

...Maybe that's just the zombie fanatic in me talking, but I honestly think that would've made for a way more interesting movie.

I think it's kind of sad that I can't bring myself to care about new stuff in the MCU anymore.

It's not about superhero-fatigue or whatever other things people are suggesting may be the cause, though. I feel like the reason I and many other people are starting to overlook new stuff and not care is because the people making those movies and stuff basically just... stopped caring about it themselves.

They stopped really putting effort into it, and it shows. There are a couple of outliers, like Moon Knight, but for every Moon Knight that comes out, there are three Loki series, or Mobius movies. Y'know?

It's become less and less rewarding and less and less fun to watch. Just cash-grabs, rather than actual stories with substance.

And I feel like this is easy to notice when you think about how Invincible and The Boys is super popular despite the idea of 'Superhero fatigue'. The difference between DC/Marvel and The Boys/Invincible? (Besides the violence, obviously.) is that 'The Boys' and 'Invincible' actually have time, effort, and love put into them. While the DCEU and the MCU are both basically being milked to death by the same people who tried to copyright 'Día de los Muertos' after they made the movie Coco.

...But hey, at least we still have the MCU before Ragnarok (+Black Panther) to enjoy, right? We also have all the animated DC and Marvel content, as well as all the comics.

Character opinion bingo (Send characters please, haha.)

I wanna do this, too! Send an ask with a character from one of my fandoms (And the words ‘character bingo’ or something similar so I know) and I’ll do one for them, lol.

By default, I’ll also fill in the free space and give a small word vomit thing about my feelings about them.

Fandoms I’m part of/I’ll fill out a bingo card for:

Marvel comics

DC comics

The Boys

DHMIS

FNAF

Cuphead

She-rah and the Princesses of power

Disney? Dreamworks? Other similar companies? (Idk, do those count as fandoms?)

He-man/She-rah (Original, haven’t seen any of the He-man remakes, yet.)

Thundercats (Original, haven’t seen any remakes, yet.)

Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss

Cookie Run

Boku no hero academia/My hero academia

Doctor Who

Dragon Ball (Note: I haven’t seen all of DBSuper yet.)

MLP:FIM (Note: Nothing from 'a new generation’ or ‘Pony life’.)

Pokemon (Note: Haven’t played Scarlet/Violet yet.)

Undertale/Deltarune

Kipo: The age of Wonderbeasts

Arcane (Note: I don’t play League of legends, oops.)

The Dragon Prince

Jurassic Park/World

Slasher movie/Horror

Dead by Daylight

   No doubt, one of my favorite things about ‘The Boy (2016)’ was how much of it was left up to your imagination and interpretation. (Death of the author, ofc. Only keeping the movie itself in mind.)

Major Spoilers for ‘The Boy (2016)’ below

   We got almost no concrete proof for anything the movie tells us about Brahms’ backstory, and what we do know can lead to multiple conclusions about the character.

   The whole ‘he killed Emily’ thing, for instance.    This is something we’re told by Malcom, who prefaces what he says by directly mentioning that this is town gossip. Which is untrue or, at best, only half-true. (Take it from someone who’s lived in a small town and had gossip and rumors spread about me and my loved ones, they’re usually spread with very little of the original context and, usually, turns into ‘I think this happened’ instead of facts, or ends up being a giant game of telephone... or both.)     We get a picture of a girl, showing that there was, in fact, an ‘Emily’ that Brahms knew, but other than that, we get nothing.

   For all we know, Emily could’ve fell and hit her head on a rock, and people started blaming Brahms for it. There’s no concrete evidence proving it either way, and I love it.

   We don’t even know that much about Brahms, really. He’s a craftsman (As seen in the ending scene.), he makes traps (The rat traps everywhere with his initials.), he can make a sandwich, he enjoys having a set schedule, and he can’t live by himself (At least, as far as we know.). ...That’s really all we know besides him being forced into the walls by his parents and being twenty-eight in the film. We also hear that he was apparently ‘Odd’, which, considering his clearly snooty-ish upbringing, could mean a lot of things.

   Why is he acting like a kid? It could be a manipulation tactic, it could be a sign of mental illness, or it could be a coping mechanism. Again, it's up to your interpretation.

   Personally, I see all this and think:     "He’s a traumatized man who’s possibly autistic (Schedule, traps may be a special interest, can’t properly live by himself, etc.), falsely rumored to have murdered his one friend, burned in a fire set by his (possibly ableist) parents, and was gaslit and manipulated into thinking Emily’s death really was his fault."

  But that’s just how I see it, of course.    I imagine there could be many ways someone could interpret the film. (For instance, my sister watched it and came out the other side with: ‘he’s guilty, creepy, and severely in need of psychological help’.) and that’s great, I love it! 

   I wish more ‘horror-ish’ movies did this. Most present horror is jump scares and gore with little to no substance, and while I enjoy a bit of gore here and there, it can be pretty tiring. (Aka: Why I loved ‘The Collector’ but disliked its sequel ‘The Collection’, lol.)

   Idk, I just felt like posting something about the movie, haha.

Natasha was a killer and tried to kill a child, Clint was a killer and murdered many people when his family was dead, Wanda brainwashed avengers, sent Hulk to a city full of innocent people, enslaved a city with population over 3000+ and tortured them, refused to let them go and tried to kill a child, Thor was the guy who tried to commit genocide after being called "a princess", Mobius worked on organization who tortured and killed innocent people AND tortured and killed them himself with a smile, Valkyrie has been enslaving people and selling them to Grandmaster for at least thousand years, Tony created Ultron and MANY other villains because of his irresponsibility, Thanos commited a bunch of genocides, tortured and mind controlled people, including his "kids", Odin conquered nine realms, turned his children into instruments and punished them for disobeying, Sylvie burned brainwashed people alive and killed innocent security guards with a smile on her face and before killing Kang looked into his eyes and asked him if he wants to beg for his life.

MCU and it's stans: They are heroes, Odin is a good dad, Thanos was right, Wanda has trauma.

Bucky killing people because of being controlled and feeling guilty for it, apologizing to his victim's families, Loki being tortured and mind controlled during NYC and resisting against Thanos's orders, ending with kill count of 74, being responsible for one crime aka Jotunheim, and sacrificing himself almost every movie

MCU and their stans: they are RESPONSIBLE! BUCKY CAN'T HIDE BEHIND THE LACK OF CONTROL! LOKI IS A CARELESS NARCISSIST AND AN IRREDEEMABLE VILLAIN WHO DESERVES BEING TORTURED!

Me:

MCU Supernatural headcanons

I’m mostly going off of vibe here. (Note: By ‘Supernatural’ I mean things like ghosts.)    Characters who believe in the Supernatural: Loki, Thor, Everyone on Asgard, Peter Parker, Gamora, Hulk, Bucky, T’challa, Scott, Wanda, Marc Spector, Steven Grant, Jake Lockley, Groot, Mantis, Darcy Lewis, Drax, Ned Leeds, Eddie Brock, Wade Wilson, Wong

   Characters who are undecided on the Supernatural: Vision, Bruce Banner, Steve, Natasha, Clint, Pietro, Rocket, Sam Wilson, James Rhodes, Carol Danvers, Nick Fury, Jane Foster, Phil Coulson, Yelena, MJ, Venom, Stephen Strange

   Characters who don’t believe in the Supernatural: Tony Stark, Hank Pym, Peter Quill, Nebula, Peggy Carter, Shuri?,

Erasing Loki won't erase me

I wrote this on Twitter and it got long:

They really hated how #Loki represented the outcasts and thus had to change him to be relatable to mainstream people instead. Strip him of everything that made him unique and punish him thoroughly in the process.

They hate us so much, they couldn't let us have one badass character we could relate to. If marginalized people feel represented, or worse empowered, by such a character, it has to be destroyed.

Just like the bullies on the schoolyard tried to beat us into normalcy, the bigots in the entertainment industry forcefully strips our beloved character of everything that made him special, everything that made him one of us.

Fuck you! We still have the original MCU Loki, and we don't forget. Some of us weren't broken by you mainstream oppression machine; we resisted on that schoolyard and we resist now.

We won't disappear because you take away our #representation. People who don't fit in will always exist; dandelions through the cracks of you asphalt, if you will. You can hurt us but you will never succeed in erasing us.