"hazel levesque is such a mom friend!!" Shes 13-14 for majority of hoo do you hear yourself. She is not the "mom friend" for a bunch of 15-17 year olds stop being racist

pixel skylines

🩵 avery cochrane 🩵
cherry valley forever
almost home

Kiana Khansmith

@theartofmadeline
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

Andulka
art blog(derogatory)
wallacepolsom
h

★
Sade Olutola
Stranger Things
official daine visual archive
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

Noah Kahan
seen from Singapore

seen from Malaysia
seen from Vietnam

seen from T1

seen from Pakistan
seen from Chile

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Ecuador

seen from United States
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Ecuador
seen from Malaysia
@patronsa1ntofnothing
"hazel levesque is such a mom friend!!" Shes 13-14 for majority of hoo do you hear yourself. She is not the "mom friend" for a bunch of 15-17 year olds stop being racist

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Babe I sent you a photo of my crime scene with highly fueled homoerotic undertones please respond
hange frommm aot
I think making Nico having a crush on Percy was a really bad character choice as it waters all of Nico’s complicated actions down to a childhood crush.
To preface, this isn’t me saying Nico shouldn’t be gay. I think his queerness fits wonderfully with his character, I just wish it was done in a different way.
In both HoH and BoO—though mostly BoO—whenever Nico’s past and even current actions are mentioned, there’s frequently some kind of implication that his motivation has something to do with his feelings for Percy. For example, in BoO, Nico mentions that he got Percy to bathe in the Styx because he believed it would make Percy love him. I dislike this because originally Nico wanted Percy in the Styx for two reasons. One was that he genuinely wanted to help in the war because he does have a good heart. The second was that he was desperate for information on his dead mother and past that he feels constantly looms over him. It was a situation where Nico wanted to help but also couldn’t resist the urge to get some kind of information about his own life. I feel it really encapsulated the complexity of both his character and him and Percy’s dynamic. Then it was watered down to ‘I want Percy to love me!’
Another example is in HoO, where Frank says, ‘I guess we would do anything for the people we love’, to which Nico replies by looking at the ground bitterly and saying, ‘Yeah, I guess we would.’ This line was foreshadowing his crush on Percy, somewhat implying that he agreed to lead the seven to the House of Hades because Percy asked him to. Have we thought that maybe Nico did it because he knew it was right..? He knew that it would benefit the world..?
Also, ALL throughout Nico’s perspectives in BoO, Percy is constantly mentioned. He is constantly centred in situations where he should be completely irrelevant. I’m not saying I hate his characterisation in HoO. There are some parts I believe are absolutely gold, such as him killing Bryce Lawrence for threatening Reyna, gaslighting Percy in SoN because he knew it everything was about timing, the showcasing of his intelligence in both political and battlefield environments…. but gosh some of it is awful.
Maybe I’m looking into it too much, but it feels like Nico’s crush implied that he bases a large portion of his reasoning and morality on Percy. It completely takes away from the previous complexity we have seen in his decision making process, which was dictated by a mixture of desperation, cold logic, and grief.
Anyway, I will continue to pretend the cupid scene never happened and Nico and Percy maintained the wonderful dynamic we saw in the first series.
tbh pjo's main conflict feels so much more fleshed out than hoo's. in pjo you have the final battle last a few days, and you have percy strategizing and everyone being more serious. percy is treated like an intelligent character in tlo because he IS a smart person, he just gets flanderized into being an idiot. you have the characters panicking and getting tired and more than two characters dying in tragic ways, putting strain on the other characters. and everyone is stressed the fuck out. in hoo the final battle lasts like a few hours and gaia gets taken down relatively fast and the only prominent deaths are octavian's death and leo's death. and octavian's death is just a mentally ill teenager killing himself during an episode and it's not treated with the emotional weight it deserves because apparently he's pure evil and irredeemable. rick riordan i dont know what you were on while writing hoo but never go on that again. im not saying i didn't enjoy hoo, but oh boy do i have problems with it. unfortunately it's my favorite out of the three

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Thing is, nico was insanely and objectively in the wrong for letting octavian unknowingly kill himself in boo, but hoo's sense of morality is so out of pocket at times I can't even truly put that on him, rick really didn't know what he was trying to say with that series most of the time. "Some deaths should not be prevented" -> what the fuck dude??? He's only 18 and was literally under the mind control of gaia????
EDIT: sorry, I was mistaken, as far as we know he didn't go crazy bc he was being manipulated by gaia, his mental health was just falling apart due to stress of the war and the misinterpretations of his auguries? Idk. Fact is, he was getting more and more out of control throughout the saga, and by the time he died, he was completely out of his mind. He needed help, and he could've gotten it — Mr. D for instance could have helped him once he got back, like he did with Chris, and they could have judged him for his crimes somewhat fairly. Instead he died horribly, and the way Rick wrote him in hoo and toa was unnecessarily mean and unsympathetic.
I mean, Rick was completely in his right to write a very unsympathetic villain whose death everyone rooted for if he wanted to. But I think he did it poorly, and Octavian's death ended up being really unsatisfying to me. Other characters who have done terrible things in the saga but had the privilege of being way less annoying to our protagonists have received much more grace from the narrative. Octavian would've had to be way worse for me to not to think of his death as unfair.
The moral judgement inconsistencies in HoO are fascinating in a vacuum:
- Percy is a monster for torturing the Goddess of Misery, but Nico can be forgiven for Bryce.
- Percy is a jerk for abandoning Calypso (He asked for her to be freed) and Bob (who was living in the Underworld) and Nico (blatant retcon), but not for ghosting Rachel post-tLO.
- People are jerks for thinking Nico is creepy and off-putting, but at the same time it's actually all in Nico's head and Will says Nico is the one distancing himself from others.
- Other people are jerks for making snap judgements of Frank, or Nico, or Annabeth, but people assuming Percy is stupid and a troublemaker get validated by the narrative.
Now obviously a lot of this stems from Rick's weirdness about certain characters and his weirdness about relationships in addition to general bad writing. Letting Rachel fall out of his life is okay because Rick viewed her mainly as a romantic rival to Annabeth. If Percy freed Calypso and was friends with her, Rick would probably say that's bad, too.
But it is kind of funny to imagine that Rick finds the main problem with torture to be how the witnesses react. Annabeth was scared, so Percy is bad. Reyna forgave him, so Nico is fine. Torture is morally neutral if there's nobody watching.
more aot x pjo :) if anyone has questions or suggestions or anything pls ask/ tell me
the minotaur, who has been murdering demigods for thousands of years: errm actually 🤨☝️☝️ monster is a slur 😔😔😔 we prefer the term mythic it’s less problematic 🫶🫶🫶
leviticus 2026 study.
Will Solace is the proof that if you put a white man/boy in any story, he will have fans, regardless of the bland cardboard the author had given as his 'personality'.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
This is such a non-issue but I really dislike when people compare ‘Hikaru’ from TSHD to Nikki Freeman from Obsession. I get that they’re both possessed in a way, but Nikki’s story is meant to symbolise a woman having her autonomy stolen by a selfish man, while ‘Hikaru’s’ is about an entity learning to feel emotions and falling in love. ‘Hikaru’ and Yoshiki truly love each other. The real Hikaru is not suffering because of this, in fact, Yoshiki being not alone was what he wanted right before he died. ‘Hikaru’ is als not being forced to love Yoshiki, he willingly loves him. Nikki on the other hand, was suffering. She was a victim and forced to ‘love’ Bear, a man who didn’t really love her back, but was instead just obsessed with her. Their dynamic stems from control and infatuation, not love. Contrasting this, Yoshikaru’s dynamic stems from love and self discovery after years of repression.
I have actually been thinking about that too, since I saw some posts about crossovers and the like before the movie's theatrical release in my country that gave me a different impression, but it really isn't the same concept.
Curry Barker has specifically clarified that Obsession is not a possession story, not in the way people usually associate that concept. Post-wish Nikki is Nikki being forced to watch herself transformed into something completely alien to herself, because that is the only way the wish of "loving Bear more than anything else in the fucking world" could ever be fulfilled: for Nikki to no longer be Nikki, and be a completely different person. These extreme romantic feelings for Bear are outside of her nature, and that's why she's also constantly fighting them off and sending cries for help.
In the other hand, 'Hikaru's feelings for Yoshiki may not be romantic, since he's incapable of having them, but his love is not forced. His feelings are genuine and of his, not influenced by the original. Mokumokuren even stated in Vol. 6's Q&A that 'Hikaru' would have killed Yoshiki had Yoshiki not agreed to keep his secret. 'Hikaru' might have originally left the mountain for the sake of fulfilling original Hikaru's wish, but he's not chained to it. He has attempted to leave Yoshiki in the past, thinking it's the best for everyone (including Yoshiki), most notably with Chapter 27, and 47.2 closed the door on the wishes department too: 'Hikaru' wants to be with Yoshiki out of his own volition, and that is an autonomy that Post-wish Nikki is not allowed to have.
Ultimately, the only thing that these two have in common is that they are horror stories, but I'm surprised that people ran off with comparisons since they... aren't really that alike? It really gave me a different impression of how Obsession would be like. It's like calling a mango and a dragonfruit the same. What they have in common is that they are both tropical fruits, and not much else.
Also, Yoshiki is a good kid. I cannot say the same about Bear after he consistently took every fucking bad decision possible. If Yoshiki were less Yoshiki, and more like Bear... Well, there's a bad ending about that. ⬇
I was completely unaware that in Obsession Nikki was not possessed, that makes the comparison even more absurd wow.
This is such a non-issue but I really dislike when people compare ‘Hikaru’ from TSHD to Nikki Freeman from Obsession. I get that they’re both possessed in a way, but Nikki’s story is meant to symbolise a woman having her autonomy stolen by a selfish man, while ‘Hikaru’s’ is about an entity learning to feel emotions and falling in love. ‘Hikaru’ and Yoshiki truly love each other. The real Hikaru is not suffering because of this, in fact, Yoshiki being not alone was what he wanted right before he died. ‘Hikaru’ is not being forced to love Yoshiki, he willingly loves him. Nikki on the other hand, was suffering. She was a victim and forced to ‘love’ Bear, a man who didn’t really love her back, but was instead just obsessed with her. Their dynamic stems from control and infatuation, not love. Contrasting this, Yoshikaru’s dynamic stems from love and self discovery after years of repression.
Actually, I really dislike when ANY ship is compared to Nikki and Bear from Obsession. Obsession was in no way a romance, projecting any romantic ship onto Nikki and Bear implies that their dynamic had any kind of real love in it, which it didn’t. I just really dislike how a movie which symbolises r@p3 and control is being made into the whole ‘toxic-obsessive-love’ trope.
I know most of the comparisons don’t have this intention and are meant to be merely a crossover, but I still can’t stop feeling weird about it.
This is such a non-issue but I really dislike when people compare ‘Hikaru’ from TSHD to Nikki Freeman from Obsession. I get that they’re both possessed in a way, but Nikki’s story is meant to symbolise a woman having her autonomy stolen by a selfish man, while ‘Hikaru’s’ is about an entity learning to feel emotions and falling in love. ‘Hikaru’ and Yoshiki truly love each other. The real Hikaru is not suffering because of this, in fact, Yoshiki being not alone was what he wanted right before he died. ‘Hikaru’ is not being forced to love Yoshiki, he willingly loves him. Nikki on the other hand, was suffering. She was a victim and forced to ‘love’ Bear, a man who didn’t really love her back, but was instead just obsessed with her. Their dynamic stems from control and infatuation, not love. Contrasting this, Yoshikaru’s dynamic stems from love and self discovery after years of repression.
I live in my own little bubble far outside of the PJO fandom where I interpret the characters in such a different way than the fandom and any canon since it started to really suck. Sometimes when I interact with fandom content I get genuinely confused.
If you say you love Nico di Angelo but don’t hate Rick Riordan, then we are very different people and I don’t trust you.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
A claim I see constantly in the PJO fandom is that if Nico healed he would go back being very bubbly and enthusiastic like his younger self because that’s his ‘true personality.’ I think the main problem with this statement is that it implies personality is inherent, and that how Nico acted anytime after TTC wasn’t his true self. An individuals personality comes entirely from socialisation— nobody is inherently anything. The way you act is based entirely off your own experiences and environment. Nico’s personality changed abruptly because of an extreme and permanent change in both his experiences and environment. That socialisation is now a part of him, and will therefore have an impact on overall personality. Him acting prickly, guarded, and more aggressive wasn’t him straying away from this ‘true self’ it was his true self changing and adapting based off of what he was experiencing. This idea that healing would reverse this is just so absurd because he can’t undo the years of socialisation which made him that way. He can adapt and improve the way he copes yes, but he still won’t act like he did when he was younger, as his younger self had entirely different experiences to base personality off.
Also, even if he didn’t go through an ounce of trauma and stayed with Bianca, who on earth has a similar personality to their 10 year old self?
Side note: I’m not saying he should be mayor of frown town together. I’m saying he would be happy in a very different way most of you guys assume.
I will forever stay true to the belief that the main problem with what the writers did to Caitlyns character is try an portray her in a good and just light.
I can enjoy morally egregious and objectively wrong characters, but there is one thing that needs to come along with them. The narrative must not shy away from the severity of their atrocities. I cannot stand when a character is doing something so obviously bad and the writers try to push that they are justified. The things Caitlyn did in S2 were objectively evil. She became a warlord and gassed the exploited class (a literal warcrime), yet somehow faced zero repercussions! On top of this, she was portrayed as the victim. A supposedly manipulated woman who was absorbed with the grief of losing her mother.
While Caitlyns dictator-like storyline is definitely not what I would have wanted in S2, it wouldn’t have been nearly as bad if the writers weren’t so afraid to portray her as in the wrong. Compared to characters like Ambessa and Jinx, Caitlyn’s harmful actions are so vague and glossed over. We don’t see the true brutality and violence she caused, but instead the apparently just reasons of why she inflicted that violence.
The cherry on top of this is that she didn’t even get a redemption. Hell, she didn’t even apologise. There was no acknowledgment of her wrongdoings, we’re just supposed to blindly forgive and understand why she was using fascist methods against the Zaunites.
I really liked Caitlyn is s1, and before s2 came out, I truly believed her character would be a representation of the unintentionally harmful ignorance held by many people born into the upper class. I remember watching season one and thinking that she would join with the Zaunites in overthrowing the corruption which plagues Piltover. Instead, the literal opposite happened. Arcane s2 I still mourn what you could have been.