let me sit in the sun with dirt between my toes

Hi anon! Here’s the gist:

The goodness or worthiness of a human life is not dependent on the abilities of the person. It is also not dependent on how easy or pleasant their life is. It is inherent.

Suffering is an evil, but it does not reduce the person to less than a person. A person in pain is still a person. 

Neediness and vulnerability is not an evil. To be dependent on others for help and care is not undignified. We are all of us dependent on one another.

Death “on one’s own terms” is not a desirable or admirable category, and is merely dressing up the ordinary category of suicide. Taking one’s own life is not better than having death “happen” to you. We wouldn’t feel comfortable with a happy, loved, young person suddenly freely deciding that it was time for them to die; we only invent this category for lives that we feel are unworthy.

Assisted suicide assumes that when a person a) no longer has all the abilities they used to (including mental capacity), b) is in pain, and/or c) finds themselves in need of a lot of help, either in the sense of nursing care or in the sense of “becoming a burden” on their family, that it is more compassionate and dignified to help this person end their life. This is an affront to the inherent worth of human life, and it also makes a mockery of compassion. Compassion literally means “to suffer with”. Rather than doing away with a person so we no longer have to face their suffering, compassion accompanies them, does its best to alleviate their hurt, and mourns with them the hurt that remains. Hospice or palliative care is infinitely more compassionate than assisted suicide. 

That’s more or less the inherent argument against assisted suicide. There are also slippery slope-type dangers which are reasons to oppose it. Once assisted suicide is legalized for those in a state of physical pain and dependence at the end of their lives, it becomes ever more difficult to explain why suicide isn’t also the answer for mentally ill people who are suffering mental anguish, or disabled people who are in physical pain and/or dependent on others, and then assisted suicide expands and becomes ever more and more predatory. Our culture worships autonomy and usefulness, which has always had the effect of making the lives of mentally ill/disabled/elderly people seem to be worth less. Assisted suicide is the ultimate reinforcement of that attitude, finally claiming that it is actually true that these people would be better off dead and society would be better off without them.

This should horrify us. What is the difference between a mentally ill person who has made the choice that their suffering is too great and their quality of life so poor they would like to exercise their right to die, and a mentally ill person who succumbs to their suicidal ideation and steps into traffic? Only a doctor’s note. And who are doctors to decide when life is no longer worth living?? How are they to know that circumstances will never improve? How are they to know what impact a person’s life has on all those around them? And how naive would we have to be to imagine that these decisions would be made from a position of neutrality? Medical facilities and insurance companies would be less and less incentivized to actually care for vulnerable groups, when they can much more easily and cheaply funnel them towards self-destruction.

The possibility of assisted suicide, once it is introduced, is not just going to be picked by individuals with a lot of options exercising their autonomy with perfect understanding and consent. It’s an option which as soon as it’s on the table exercises a kind of pressure: aren’t you afraid of pain? You don’t want to be a financial burden on your family, do you? What good is your life if all you can do is lie in a bed? Won’t your loved ones come to resent all the help you need? If insurance doesn’t cover care and it does covered assisted suicide isn’t it selfish for you to go on living? Its very possibility is corrosive of civilized society, breaking down the connections we have to one another and leaving us all alone and afraid. It holds our worst fears over our heads—what if I’m only really worthwhile because of what I can do, what if helping me is a burden, what if my pain is too big for people to love me in it. I think these fears are wrong about human nature and human friendship. But a culture which has legal assisted suicide is a culture which does its best to make those fears into a reality.

Now, there still is nuance. Purposefully ending one’s own life is morally impermissible, but that does not mean that we are obliged to prolong life infinitely using any means necessary. If there is a surgery which will slightly prolong your life but drastically decrease your quality of life, you do not have to have the surgery. If you’ve been on dialysis for years and the toll it’s taking on your body is starting to pile up, you can cease dialysis. You can have a DNR. You can receive morphine in the days leading up to your death, even in quantities which would hasten (but not cause) your death, if that is what is required to keep you comfortable. If death is on its way to you, it’s okay to stand and face it and allow it to come. 

This video depicts a moment that is nearly impossible to observe: a sperm whale surfacing with a giant squid clenched between its teeth. These predators hunt at depths exceeding 800 meters, where light does not penetrate, and only biosonar directs the pursuit. Consequently, clear surface images are exceedingly rare.

Gordon Parks captured the Jim Crow South with a quiet, devastating clarity—using his camera as both witness and weapon. Through intimate portraits and everyday scenes, he exposed the cruelty of segregation not with sensationalism but with humanity, dignity, and truth. Parks showed Black life in the South as it was lived: tender, resilient, disciplined, and determined, even under oppressive laws. His photographs didn’t just document injustice—they challenged America to see what it preferred to ignore.

Bonus: He went from believing she's a dumb bunny, to joking about her being a dumb bunny, to letting her know she is not a dumb bunny

I think one of the reasons wildehopps as a ship is so beloved amongst fans of these films (and just in general on the internet) is because they are the quintessential booktok romance done right. they are the best version of what everyone goes to booktok looking for. In fact, I’d go as far as to say they’re the most Jane Austen-coded couple I’ve seen in a long time. Hear me out okay I’m going somewhere with this

I don’t personally frequent booktok (I don’t have the TikTok app, I get all my info from YouTube or Tumblr), but as a writer who knows sometimes ya gotta dig into bad stories in order to figure out what makes them bad, I know enough about what that side of the internet enjoys in the way of tropes. Normally, I’m not someone who would suggest writing a story based on tropes alone, but even I can agree that having one in mind can be helpful in figuring out your characters’ dynamics and arcs. The most widely talked about romantic tropes on the clock app to my knowledge are enemies-to-lovers and banter and grumpy/sunshine and slow burn and an MMC who would ruin the world for his love, to name a few. The problem I’ve found with most booktok promoted books, however, is that these tropes are taken and written without an understanding of what makes them work. Enemies become lovers in 50 pages, the banter is spiteful and mean or just downright not clever (the ‘should I call you Prince, or pathetic?’ ‘You could’ve just called me yours’ audio I hear on YouTube drives. Me. Insane.), the sunshine is almost always a ditz or a show-off who falls head-over-heels for the grump, a controlling manchild who just wants someone to sleep with, and the “burning of the world to protect her” becomes so unhealthily close to obsession that it’s frightening for the girl in question.

all of these ideas are used without digging any deeper into why they originally clicked with readers, before they were so overdone that everyone sort of rolls their eyes at just hearing about them. they’re the frosting on a hollow cake: you might have something that tastes sweet at first, but there’s zero depth, and you’re left unsatisfied.

and here’s why I think wildehopps does it all right where many others get it wrong.

think about it for a second. Judy is the optimistic, bubbly girl boss who takes no bull from anybody. she’s witty and intelligent and would fight the sun if she were capable and angry enough. She’s what all the booktok FMCs want to be, but what makes her different is that she’s also kind. She can be gentle with those around her. She’s emotional, she allows herself to cry and embrace her loved ones. She likes to dress up (as seen in the z2 gala scene) and enjoy more feminine things, she’s a girl’s girl (“I love your hair!” as a seemingly innocuous moment that ends up saving hers and Nick’s life), she always sticks her neck out for someone in need, she is so very invested in doing the right thing no matter what. She is not a stoic soldier who only thinks of herself and how powerful she could be. And what else? It makes her flawed. She bore hurtful biases against Nick in z1, even if she didn’t realize it. She has a savior complex that gets her in trouble, a tiny thirst for glory she doesn’t truly recognize in herself. She’s prideful and pushes herself too hard because she’s scared that the world could perceive her as weak and unskillful. A dumb bunny. Despite being a rabbit, she feels incredibly human. Real.

And Nick! He is the textbook example of the snarky MMC with a dark past but a heart of gold buried beneath his tough exterior. He can be shifty, he behaves as though nothing anyone says can wound him, and he would do anything, even give up his own life, to make sure Judy is safe. He smirks nonstop, but his sincere smiles vastly outshine them. He even does the “lean against the doorframe” thing that’s so popular right now, but in more of an endearingly awkward, “I can’t let Judy see my shrine of her just inside my apartment” than seductive way. He is what everyone tries to write the Perfect Boyfriend as, yet like Judy, what makes him different is that his flaws are not treated like points of attraction, but like traits he must work on and learn to overcome. His inability to open up with Judy about his past and his fear of losing her isn’t expressed as though he were the dark and brooding bad boy, the tortured prince who was dealt a rotten hand in life (though never actually tries to fix it). His silence is a problem in his partnership with Judy. It’s something to sympathize with but it isn’t a characteristic of being attractive, it isn’t good that Nick bottles his feelings up and plans never to share them with the best thing that ever happened to him. The films correctly portray Nick as hurting himself because he’s choosing not to be honest with his partner. It doesn’t make him mysterious, it makes him relatable, someone you actively root for to improve.

Even better, when he does decide to take the leap, he ends up being incredibly vulnerable with Judy—“I make jokes about your ears and I tell you that you try too hard, when the truth is I just don’t want you to get hurt.”—which she reciprocates because she knows she can trust him with her emotions. Nick has endured hell and back and does not want to be alone any longer, but never once is this conveyed as “uwu soft morally gray Prince Charming” by the narrative. He is not a SJM type character, he’s just a decent guy who’s attempting to turn himself around by virtue of his altruistic partner’s faith in him.

Furthermore, Nick isn’t controlling or manipulative of Judy. He’s sly and sneaky in the first film, but he never does anything that could hurt her, even before they were friends. He never throws her into danger and expects her to find her own way out of it, he never coerces her into situations she would be uncomfortable with (apart from the Naturalist Club, though he gives Judy an out before they even go in and she doesn’t take it), he never uses her for his own means. His love isn’t based on what she can do for him. It isn’t self-centered. She is not his plaything, she is his person.

Speaking of that, unlike several, confusingly popular booktok couples (Rhysand and Feyre, Paedyn and Kai, Violet and Xaden, etc.), we actually comprehend as an audience why Judy and Nick love each other. While yes, it is a family-friendly series so you can’t go too deeply into it regardless, and physical attraction is necessary to an extent, Nick doesn’t love Judy because she’s “hot” or “sexy”. There’s no ogling of her physique, no fixation on outer beauty. He dislikes her a great deal in the beginning, but what wins him over is her compassion, her resilience, her idealism, and her belief in who he could be. She’s passionate and she’s brave, smart and relentless. And she gave him a chance, showed him there was more to life than just surviving. And when it comes to protecting her, yes he does it because he doesn’t want to lose her, but he also cannot stomach her being in pain. He stands up for her when her career is threatened, he is always looking for a way to comfort her through gentle touches. Instead of “burning the world down for her”, he shields her from the fiery darts by taking them for himself. He doesn’t take away her agency by stopping her from doing her job just because it’s dangerous, rather he walks through the mayhem with her, even whilst being afraid. He is ride or die for his bunny without a doubt, and I know we as a fandom like to joke about them being codependent, but Nick isn’t snarling at anyone who so much as looks at her (in z2, he only began to show his jealousy when Pawbert was actively flirting with her). He isn’t romanticizing being feral or insane about her. He loves her for who she is, and she for him. They would do anything for each other. Selflessness.

Same with Judy. She loves him because he’s intelligent and cunning, he believes in her when no one else does, he brings her back down to earth when her head is in the clouds, and he’s a profoundly considerate person as well as fairly emotionally intelligent when he’s encouraged to be. He’s good, and she wants to see him be good, she wants him to excel to his fullest potential. Like Nick, she would give up the rest of her days in a heartbeat if it meant he would be safe from harm; in Zootopia 2’s climax, she throws herself off a wall to reach him without having any idea Gary was behind her to catch her. She was willing to die with him if she couldn’t rescue him. She wants what’s best for her fox without asking for anything in return.

Then there’s the age gap. From what I’ve seen, people on booktok love age gap romances. Specifically if it’s between a 19 yr old human girl and a 500+ yr old faerie man. Good stuff, for sure (I say in complete sarcasm). Not only is it incredibly creepy that an eldritch god would be dating a teenager just because she’s “the chosen one”, it also adds a power imbalance that makes it so he is always in control over her, and she must go along with whatever he decides is best for her. He labels it as being protective, but it’s nothing more than abuse given the girl literally cannot fight back, or she’ll be punished in some magical, Lovecraftian way. Because these MMCs are never emotionally stable.

Nick and Judy, though? Boom, baby, 8 yr age gap. Far more reasonable than hundreds of years in between. As of z2, Judy is 25 and Nick is 33. Both are well into adulthood, thus nothing creepy can be construed, and there is no power imbalance because they are equal partners. They work together, they share the weight of the world together. She may be leading the team but she does not boss him around or force him to do whatever she says because she’s saying it, and he most certainly doesn’t follow like a subservient puppy…he goes where she goes so that he can keep her safe. In the second movie, when Nick proposes running away together to Outback Island about a dozen times during the mystery, to Judy’s consistent refusal, at any moment he is free to walk away. She wants him with her, but she isn’t keeping him there against his will. Still, Nick doesn’t leave her. The age gap is wonderful too because it allows Nick to have some knowledge of life and the way the world works that Judy doesn’t without it seeming as though he has an advantage over her. Her view of the city needing someone to help make it better is her hopeful mindset not having been crushed by the cruelties of reality yet, and Nick insisting the world is what it is, Carrots, is his reality rearing its ugly head. She gives him hope to dream, he reminds her not to let her imagination run away with her. Time and past trauma has cultivated who they are, but together, they’re learning they can be more than that.

Oh, and the banter. “It’s called a hustle, sweetheart.” “I think you’d actually make a pretty good cop.” “Ugh, how dare you.” “I was small and emotionally unbalanced like you, once.” “Har har.” “Darling, I think you’re giving me white hairs.” “Oh, I’m sorry, is my fear hilarious to you?” “No, of course not. We’re partners, and whenever I’m uncomfortable, you’re always very considerate of my feelings—LOOK OUT SNAKE SKIN!” “What is your problem? Does seeing me fail somehow make you feel better about your own sad, miserable life?” “It does, 100%.” “Love ya, partner. But I am still me, so you’re only getting that once a decade.” “Hopps and Wilde?” “Wilde and Hopps!” Listen, I could go on forever, okay?

And unlike dozens of booktok stories that claim to be “slow burns” yet get the main two characters together 3/4 of the way into the first book, Nick and Judy are a genuine slow burn. The way it’s looking, they won’t officially be together until around the end of the final movie in their trilogy! Unless Disney decides to make more than three installments in the franchise, it’s going to take almost the entirety of their story to come together. That’s a freaking snail’s pace and I love it, it’s torturous.

wildehopps is the enemies-to-lovers, grumpy/sunshine, slow burn, girlboss/chill guy ship booktok goes nuts over, but they’re characterized with depth. they’re fleshed out, they behave like actual people, they aren’t obsessed with physical appearances (again, family movies, but even still), and their love for each other is based on self-sacrifice. Judy is not a power-wielding boss babe who demands praise and worship from absolutely everybody, Nick is not a violent or possessive dark lord who hurts his partner but calls it love. They didn’t like each other upon first meeting, but mutual understanding and fondness shaped them into friends, and unwavering loyalty through hardship further shaped them into what we can safely assume will one day be romantic partners. They look after each other. They are best friends that are also in love. As Jared Bush himself has said, they are soulmates.

I like to hc that he legitimately *didnt remember lab safety* until he recovered the memory in that exact moment and went oh fuck.