sei

i think one thing that gets missed in discussions of like. “okay depiction of abuse/problematic dynamics” where the person is on the side of “it's fine to depict problematic things as long as the victim is clearly traumatized/not enjoying it” is that a part of the way in which abuse functions is by changing what intuitively feels good or bad to a person, that is to say, why people stay in abusive relationships is bc your brain can be wired, as a result of sustained trauma, to only feel comfortable or at-home in such situations, and to not recognise that anything is wrong in the first place. that is how conditioning and grooming work, it's how people stay in awful situations for years... and how do you depict that? an abusive relationship is still a relationship, real victims have loved and continue to love those who perpetrate intimate violence against them. you can, from a distance, see and say that the love is wrong and should not exist. but when you're narrating a story from close quarters, you can't effectively differentiate without context, an author depicting as romantic a manifestly abusive relationship and a victim and perpetrator whose inherent sense of themselves, of right and wrong, of boundaries, and acceptable forms of intimacy, has been warped through abuse.

America killed 3 million Vietnamese people, we put half of South Vietnam in Concentration Camps, we dropped more bombs on North Vietnam than were dropped by both sides in WW2, We permeantly poisoned the land with Agent Orange, the American war on Vietnam was the most inhuman and despicable action in this nations history, the Vietnamese had every right to do whatever they wanted to the occupation

When you learn what the US soldiers did to the Vietnamese, you'll never stop praying for the death of America.

do you like my repetitive and outdated music taste

certified door post