INTP writing

Dottolone is more toxic than Dottoscara because it is celebrated by the masses, and they need their villains to be good and safe. Thinking about abuse is terrible for them - it justifies the abuser if he behaves well with others. The greatest irony in the Genshin Impact fandom is that the ship most people call "wholesome" and "peak romance" is actually far more toxic than the one they label as "problematic." I'm talking about Dottolone versus Dottoscara. Same Abuser, Two Very Different Victims. Dottore is the same person in both ships. The same mad scientist. The same manipulator. The same abuser.

For Scaramouche (purple-haired, purple-eyed artificial being): Dottore destroyed his village, manipulated him into joining the Fatui, gave him a human heart in a disturbingly Hannibal-coded move, used him as a test subject, built segments from his blueprint, tried turned him into a god, and gave him a giant mecha and has been with him for 400 years. This is universally called "pure abuse" and "unforgivable." Shipping it is treated as a moral crime. For Pantalone (also purple-haired, purple-eyed): Dottore saved him from being just a test subject meat, gave him immortality through experimental elixirs as he is still a test subject, replaced his organs and check on organs as he is still a test subject, made him a Fatui Harbinger, and has been with him for 400 years. And now Pantalone dates Dottore's segments - which were created from Scaramouche's body. This is celebrated as "pure love," "beautiful power couple," and "true romance."

The same Dottore. The same methods (experimentation, immortality, power). Completely opposite moral judgment from the fandom. Why Dottolone Is More Dangerous: Dottoscara shippers, at least, see the relationship for what it is: a horror story. A tragedy. A deeply messed up dynamic between an abuser and his victim. They don't try to paint it as healthy. Dottolone shippers, on the other hand, desperately need their villains to be safe and good. They need to believe that Dottore can be a loving, devoted partner - as long as it's with the "right" person. They romanticize the abuse, rebrand it as "Hannibal-coded romance," and get furious when someone points out the ugly truth. They call Dottolone "Hannibal x Will Graham coded." That's actually hilarious. Because giving someone a human heart as a "gift" (which Dottore literally did to Scaramouche with Niva's heart) is peak Hannibal behavior. Yet that part only counts as romantic when it's convenient for Dottolone. The Real Toxicity: The celebration of Dottolone is more dangerous than the acknowledgment of Dottoscara's darkness because: It enables the abuser. It sends the message that if the abuser treats one person well (or appears to), then the previous abuse doesn't matter. It requires active erasure of Scaramouche's trauma so the fantasy can stay clean. It teaches that abuse is only bad when it happens to the character you don't ship. When it happens "off-screen" or to someone else - it's fine.

The Dottolone fandom really thought they could have their cute domestic cake and eat it too. But here comes the uncomfortable truth that makes everyone suddenly very quiet: Pantalone is romantically involved with Dottore's segments. And every single one of those segments exists because they were created using Scaramouche's body and data as the foundation. In other words… Pantalone is dating the "children" of Dottore and Scaramouche. Yes, you read that right. The segments that people are now happily shipping with Pantalone in fluffy and spicy scenarios? Those are the direct result of Dottore's experiments on Scaramouche. They are, in the most literal and grotesque sense, the "offspring" of that horrific process. The Cognitive Dissonance is Beautiful. When it was just Dottore and Scaramouche, the fandom screamed:

"This is abuse!" "Scaramouche was his victim!" "How can anyone ship this?!"

But now that Pantalone entered the chat and started dating the literal products of that abuse… suddenly it's:

"He's so gentle with the segments~" "Domestic Dottolone ❤️" "They're building a family together!!"

The same segments that were born from Scaramouche's suffering are now being treated as desirable romantic partners for Pantalone. And the fandom is eating it up. They went from "Dottore touching Scaramouche is disgusting" to "Pantalone touching Dottore's Scaramouche-based segments is hot" in record time. Let's Call It What It Is This is peak fandom brainrot. You can't have it both ways:

Either the segments carry the weight of their origin (which makes the Dottolone dynamic extremely messed up), Or they don't (which means you've been massively downplaying what happened to Scaramouche this whole time).

"Making a Kid Together": Fandom Hypocrisy in the Dottore & Pantalone Ship Dottore and Pantalone casually talk about creating a new Dottore segment using Pantalone's memories, and suddenly half fandom explodes with joy:

"They're making a kid together!" "Domestic Dottolone moments~" "Found family goals!!" "This is so cute I'm crying"

How adorable. Two Harbingers making a baby. Peak romance. …Except they already did that before. Every existing Dottore segment was created using Scaramouche's data and body as the foundation. Scaramouche was literally the blueprint. The prototype. The original "material" used to manufacture multiple Dottore segments. They already made "kids" together - technically. Dottore and Scaramouche already have several "children" running around in the form of Dottore's segments. But apparently that version doesn't count as "cute baby-making". That one is never celebrated as wholesome domestic bliss. It's simply… ignored. Erased. Never mentioned in the new "they're making a baby!!" discourse. When it's Dottore + Pantalone creating a new segment = "Omg they're parents now, this is beautiful~" When it's Dottore + Scaramouche (who was the actual base for all current segments) = radio silence. No "found family", no "they made kids together", no celebration. The same concept. The same scientific baby-making process. Completely different reaction. The fandom doesn't actually care about "two villains making a baby together". They only care when it's the right two villains. The ones they currently ship. Everything else gets conveniently memory-holed so the new fluffy narrative can stay intact. This is comedy at its finest. The fandom spent years treating one "baby-making" situation as completely normal to ignore, and is now losing their minds over the second one as the cutest thing ever. It's not about the act. It's never been about the act. It's about which ship gets to wear the cute domestic filter this season. Congratulations, everyone. The hypocrisy is no longer subtle.

The Infantilisation of Wanderer: From Ancient Harbinger to "Cute Akademiya Freshman" There's something particularly infuriating about the way Wanderer is currently portrayed and perceived by both the game and a large part of the fandom. After everything - after centuries of existence, after being a Fatui Harbinger, a military operative, a spy, a manipulator, and someone who has committed acts of war and terrorism - he has been placed into the Akademiya as a student. And the fandom ran with it. Suddenly a huge part of the audience started treating him like a moody teenager doing his first semester at university. "Babyboy is studying~", " Akademiya student arc is so cute", "he's finally living his teen life". The comments, fanarts, and headcanons are full of this strange, almost aggressive infantilisation. No. Stop. He Is Not a Teenager Wanderer is centuries old. He is not "a young man finding his place in the world." He is an ancient being who has:

Led military operations Conducted espionage Betrayed and been betrayed on a national scale Possessed god-like power Personally contributed to the suffering of thousands

He is a former military officer and intelligence operative who was stripped of his rank and forced into a civilian academic environment as part of his punishment/rehabilitation. Calling him a "student" in the cutesy, high-school sense is not harmless. It is a deliberate narrative choice to reduce his threat level, his history, and his dignity. Why This Infantilisation Is Harmful This is the continuation of the same process we've already seen:

First they took away his name and gave him "Hat Guy". Then they made him "healed and friendly". Now they turned one of the most dangerous individuals in Teyvat into a quirky college student.

It's systematic infantilisation - the process of stripping an adult (especially a formerly powerful and dangerous one) of maturity, agency, and gravitas to make him more palatable and "adorable". This serves two purposes:

It makes him safer for mass consumption. It punishes the version of him that people feared and respected.

In the sprawling narrative of Genshin Impact, few characters have undergone as stark and controversial a transformation as Scaramouche - from the Balladeer to Wanderer, and finally reduced to the infantilizing moniker "Hat Guy." What occurred with this character is not merely a redemption arc. It is something colder, more calculated, and significantly more cynical: a case study in narrative gaslighting, punitive redemption, and selective narrative punishment. The Allegory of the Banquet and the Crust Imagine a table where the same authors serve different dishes to similar characters: To Lohen: a full banquet. A character allowed to be arrogant, bloodthirsty, sadistic in battle, and emotionally cold from the very beginning. His darkness is not a flaw to be corrected - it is flavor, heritage, and aesthetic appeal. To Dottore and Pantalone: another lavish banquet. Four hundred years of shared history, mutual power, immortality-adjacent elixirs, and a dark romance framed as sophisticated compatibility rather than abuse. To Scaramouche: a dry crust of bread. Once a proud, vengeful, sadistic Harbinger with centuries of justified rage, he is stripped of name, status, and much of his edge. What remains is diluted sarcasm, public atonement, and the humiliating label "Hat Guy."

The same developers who proved they are capable of writing compellingly dark characters chose to serve one persona a feast and another mere scraps. This disparity is not accidental. It is a deliberate narrative choice. "Hat Guy" as Symbolic Humiliation The name "Hat Guy" is not a harmless joke. It is a deliberate act of diminishing. After centuries of existence as Kabukimono, Scaramouche, The Balladeer, and Sixth Harbinger - titles soaked in tragedy, ambition, and menace - the character is reduced to a placeholder defined by an accessory. This is not character development. This is narrative emasculation. It strips him of gravitas and replaces it with cutesy accessibility. The humiliation is compounded by how Hoyoverse uses it: casually, repeatedly, almost mockingly. It signals to the audience that the proud, dangerous figure they once feared and admired has been successfully tamed and rebranded into something harmless and marketable. Punitive Redemption: Punishment for Being Liked Traditional redemption arcs seek to explore growth. What Scaramouche received feels closer to punitive redemption - a redemption designed not just to reform the character, but to punish both him and the audience that loved his darker incarnation.

He is forced through amnesia, loss of power, public moral lectures, and constant reminders of his past sins. His sadism and rage are pathologized as "trauma responses" that must be cured for him to be worthy. The very traits that made him magnetic (pride, cruelty, unapologetic vengeance) are treated as stains that need scrubbing.

The release of the character Lohen has exposed deep structural tensions within the Genshin Impact fandom, particularly among those invested in Scaramouche/Wanderer. At its core, the issue is not mere preference for one design over another, but a clear pattern of narrative double standards by the developers (Hoyoverse) combined with predictable psychological responses from the audience.

Archetypal Overlap and Resulting Fan Division When a new character shares a highly specific archetype with an established favorite traumatized pretty male with sharp tongue, sadistic undertones, elegant design, and tragic backstory two distinct audience segments emerge: Expansionist segment: Individuals with high openness to experience treat the new character as additional reinforcement of the archetype. Their attachment is to the type rather than a singular instance. Exclusivist segment: Those with stronger anxious or possessive attachment perceive the newcomer as a threat to the uniqueness and emotional ownership of their original favorite. This division is not irrational. It follows directly from parasocial attachment theory: heavy emotional investment in a character creates a sense of personal territory. When that territory is infringed upon by a near-clone who receives different narrative treatment, conflict is inevitable.

Core Narrative Asymmetry: Forced Redemption vs. Permitted Darkness The central logical inconsistency lies in how Hoyoverse handles morally dark traits across similar characters: Scaramouche was introduced as a genuine antagonist with active sadism, betrayal, and manipulative behavior. His arc culminated in a heavy redemption process involving amnesia, loss of status, public atonement, and gradual softening. While some sadistic traits remain, they are significantly diluted and framed through self-deprecation or comedy. Lohen occupies the same aesthetic and personality space but is permitted to retain bloodthirst, arrogance, and sadistic combat enjoyment from the outset. His darkness is contextualized as culturally acceptable (Knights of Favonius) rather than something requiring correction. Logical problem: This creates an observable double standard. The developers demonstrated they are capable of writing an unapologetically sharp, cruel character within the game's moral framework. The decision to force Scaramouche through sanitization while granting Lohen narrative permission reveals a selective application of redemption mandates. This is not creative evolution - it is inconsistent authorship. One character is punished narratively for his nature; the other is rewarded for it.

Ableism and the Myth of Mandatory Healing A particularly insidious element is the fandom rhetoric surrounding Wanderer's "healing." Common celebratory statements - "He has changed," "He is healed," "He is good now," "He has friends" - contain an implicit ableist framework: Pre-redemption traits (rage, sadism, vengeance, social alienation) are pathologized as illness. Post-redemption traits (helpfulness, social integration, reduced aggression) are presented as the only valid form of existence. This reflects saneism - the belief that certain emotional states and personality structures are inherently defective and must be cured for the character to deserve sympathy or love. By celebrating the erasure of Scaramouche's darker authenticity, parts of the fandom unconsciously endorse the idea that complexity and moral grayness are lesser states. Lohen's existence makes this worse: he proves that darkness can be integrated without mandatory "fixing." The contrast highlights that Scaramouche's sanitization was a deliberate choice, not an inevitability of the medium.

Double Standards in Shipping and Relational Dynamics The inconsistency extends into romantic interpretations, most notably in Dottore pairings: Dottore × Scaramouche: Framed as clear, long-term abuse. The power imbalance and experimental trauma are emphasized, positioning Scaramouche as eternal victim. Dottore × Pantalone: Frequently romanticized as "pure love," mutual understanding, or a sophisticated power couple. The same abusive traits in Dottore are reframed as compatible or even attractive when paired with an equal-status character. This reveals a selective morality based on perceived vulnerability. When the partner is coded as "fragile" (Scaramouche), toxicity must be condemned. When the partner is coded as "equal" (Pantalone), toxicity becomes romanticizable. Such patterns further invalidate the original dark version of Scaramouche: his abusive dynamics are preserved only as trauma porn, while other characters get to explore similar darkness with narrative approval.

Validation Deficit and Emotional Investment Loss Fans who connected with Scaramouche precisely because of his unfiltered rage, pride, and refusal to conform experience a legitimate loss of validation. The character represented a symbolic rejection of "you must become palatable to be worthy." His arc instead reinforced the opposite message: even ancient trauma-driven darkness must eventually submit to social integration.